I Hear, Therefore I Exist

Audio, Ergo Sum

Evolution of Biblical Hermeneutics in the Light of Dei Verbum :

Joseph Pamplany
 Alpha Research Serial - 07

I Hear, Therefore I Exist

Audio, Ergo Sum

Evolution of Biblical Hermeneutics in the Light of Dei Verbum

Joseph Pamplany

Alpha Publications
Sandesabhavan, P.B. No. 71, Thalassery - 670 101
Tel: 0091490 2344727 I Fax: 0091490 2343707
www.alphathalassery.org I email: [email protected]
 Contents

Title : I Hear, Therefore I Exist Preface ................................................................................... 07

Audio, Ergo Sum 1. Are We Hearing or Seeing the Word of God? ....................... 12
Evolution of Biblical Hermeneutics in the Light of Dei Verbum 2. Antiochian and Alexandrean Schools .................................... 27
Author : Joseph Pamplany
Language : English 3. Augustinian and Thomistic Medievalism ................................ 39
Category : Biblical Theology, Hermeneutics 4. Bibliolatry or Prima Scriptura? ............................................... 49
Alpha Research Serial (ARS) - Volume 7 5. From the Enlightenment to the Modern Era ........................... 55
6. Late Modern to Postmodern ................................................. 65
Serial Editors : Joseph Pamplany 7. Dei Verbum ........................................................................ 79
Fr. Joseph Kakkaramattam
Dr. Philip Kaviyil 8. Principles of Interpretation .................................................... 98
Dr. Sr. Mary Vattappara SH 9. Towards a Biblical Epistemology ........................................... 106
Published by : Alpha Institute of Theology and Science, Sandesa
Bhavan, Tellicherry, 670 101, Kannur, Kerala, India 10. Tradition as Understood by Dei Verbum .............................. 119
Ph: 0490 - 2344727, 2343707 11. Audio, Ergo Sum ................................................................. 129
Published on : 2018 September 8
Printing : Vimala Offset, Thalassery 12. Finality of Revelation .......................................................... 143
ISBN No : 9788-190851-415/3
© Copy Right : All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be
2018 reproduced, stored in or introduced into a retrieval
system, or transmitted, in any form, or by any means,
electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or
otherwise without the prior written permission of
the publisher.
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum

Preface

I n the course of Christian history many methods have been

employed in order to interpret Bible, the record of God’s
revelation. As the Bible is essentially related to the Church
the interpretation of scripture aims at the unearthing of the principal
bond between the ongoing life and thought of the church and the
documents which contain its earliest traditions. This anthology of
articles analyses the assorted aspects of biblical hermeneutics.
The English word “hermeneutics” comes from the Greek verb
“hermeneuo” and noun “hermeneia.” These words are ultimately
sourced back to Hermes the Greek mythological god who brought
the messages of the gods to the mortals. He was responsible for
communicating what was beyond human understanding into a form
that human intelligence could grasp. He was also known as the god
of science, inventions, speech, writing, literature and eloquence. He
was the messenger or interpreter of the gods, and particularly of his
father Zeus. Thus the verb came to refer to bringing someone to
understanding of something in his language. “Hermeneutics is both a
science and an art. As a science, it enunciates principles, investigates
the laws of thought and language, and classifies its facts and results.
As an art, it teaches what application these principles should have,
and establishes their soundness by showing their practical value in
the elucidation of the more difficult scriptures. The hermeneutical art
thus cultivates and establishes a valid exegetical procedure.”1
The word “exegesis” is a transliteration of the Greek word means
“narrative, description, or explanation, interpretation.” In the
Septuagint this noun is used in Judges 7:15 in referring to the

6 7
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
“interpretation” of a dream. The verb “exegeomai” means to records of biblical interpretation comes to us in the writing of
“explain, interpret, tell, report, describe.” “Hermeneutics may be Nehemiah in the Old Testament. When the people of Israel returned
regarded as the theory that guides exegesis; exegesis may be from the Babylonian Captivity under Ezra, they requested that Ezra
understood as the practice and the set of procedures for discovering read to them from the Scriptures (the Pentateuch). Nehemiah (8:8)
the author’s intended meaning within a text. It is to be observed that records for us that when Ezra read from the Book of the Law of
the correlation between the person and the word is foundational in God, he “made clear” and “gave meaning” so that the people could
exegesis. The task of interpreters of the Bible is to find out the meaning understand what was being read.4 Dividing history into discrete
of a statement (command, question) for the author and for the first periods is a subjective enterprise.
hearers or readers, and thereupon to transmit that meaning to modern The early Christian heresies were results of the erroneous
readers.2 There are two principles regarding the correlation of interpretation of the Scripture. During this time allegorizing became
meaning and persons: (i) Persons mean things by words, words apologetic in nature. Problem of relationship of Old Testament with
have no meaning in themselves. It means that there is no meaning New Testament began early. They confused typology with
without a meaner and a series of words has meaning only if some allegorizing, and Church authority became a tool for opposing
person means something by them. (Parrots do not mean anything heresies. Valentinus (born, c.A.D. 100) was an extremely effective
by their sentences; persons can mean something with the same communicator and his followers were the first to compose
sentences).3 (ii) The locus of meaning is in the propositions, not in commentaries on New Testament books. Secondly, Marcion (active
the persons who affirm them. It means that persons cause meaning, ca. A.D.140-155) taught that the Old Testament was useless as a
but propositions constitute meaning and the locus of meaning for the Christian document. He also severely edited the New Testament,
interpreter is the author’s meaning expressed in the text. producing one in which only Paul’s epistles were included, together
Insights from scholars of pre-modern and ancient generations are with a condensed version of Luke’s Gospel, carefully purged of any
increasingly valued in dialogue with contemporary explorations into Jewish “contamination.” All the Gnostics held that the God of the
the meaning of the Bible. If we take certain statements in the Bible Old Testament was another lesser deity than the God of the New.
itself it will help us to see how the Holy Spirit wants us to interpret The Fathers of the Church counted on the heretics with their correct
His Word. “To the law and to the testimony, if they speak not interpretation. The main three were Justin Martyr ( c. A.D. 100-
according to this word, it is because there is no light in them” (Isa 163), a converted Platonist who was the first to use the term “Israel”
8:20). What is important about this verse is that it implies a standard to describe the Church (A.D. 160). Irenaeus (c. A.D. 130-200),
by which false teaching can be measured. For that standard to have Bishop of Lyons in Gaul (modern day France), wrote extensively
any credence it has to be literally interpreted. Moreover, the reference against the heretics, and in the course of doing so, produced the first
to “the law and the testimony” (v. 16) implies that the whole Old formulation for Biblical interpretation; the so-called “Rule of Faith.”
Testament is to be interpreted in its natural, normative sense. In Towards the end of the patristic period, Jerome, Vincent, and
John 21:21-23 the Evangelist seems to want to make a point that Augustine paved the way for two emphases which were to endure
what God says must be grasped before we can correctly interpret. for more than a thousand years: allegorization and church authority.
Thus, we think there is scriptural warrant for plain or ‘literal’ In the middle ages, Stephen Langton (1155-1228) the Archbishop
hermeneutics. of Canterbury made chapter divisions in the Bible (the Vulgate) and
Thousands of years ago scribes and priests were interpreting sacred he held that spiritual interpretation is superior to literal interpretation.
Hebrew writings even before these became part of the canonical The great theologian Thomas Aquinas also tried to resolve the tension
collection we call the Bible. As Lewis points out, one of the earliest betweenspiritual and literal sense of the Bible. He is of the opinion
8 9
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
that, He held that the literal meaning is basic, but that other senses communicates with human beings. As such it touches on questions
are built on it. Since the Bible has a divine author as well as human about Scripture, tradition and the teaching authority of the Church.
authors, he argued, it has a spiritual sense. “The literal sense is that It remains true that the proper place for the Bible is in the church.
which the author intends, but God being the Author, we may expect The church existed before the creation of scripture; it is the
to find in the Scripture a wealth of meaning.” “The things signified by environment of scripture. Both church and scripture witness to Christ;
the words (the literal sense) may also signify other things (the spiritual but the church came first, and scripture was produced within the
sense).” church for the use of the members of the body. This environment
Contemporary interpreters approach the Bible from many directions often allows a sympathetic understanding of scripture, an insight into
and produce different results. Side by side on a single library shelf its genius. I humbly admit that I have incorporated several electronic
today one can find historical studies, sermonic reflections, theological sources in this book to give flesh and blood to my ideas, even to the
treatises, semiotic analyses, cultural analyses, and devotional guides risk of plagiarism.
etc. These myriads of interpretation are all pointing towards the
semantic richness of the text. At the completion of this work, I express my sincere gratitude to
Holy Spirit, the real author of the Sripture is the agent of Biblical Archbishop Mar George Njaralakatt and Archbishop Emeritus Mar
interpretation. The Spirit motivates our effort of understanding (Acts George Valiamattam for their paternal guidance and ineffable love.
8:26-40). It is true that certain passages of the Bible, are enigmatic It would have remained an unfinished agenda, if I was deprived of
and without proper interpretation, one cannot understand them. For the support of my co-workers at Sandesa Bhavan and Alpha Institute.
example, 2 Pet. 3:16 observes, “ There are some things in them The entire credit of this work is due to Dharmaram Vidyakshetra
[Paul’s letters] that are hard to understand.” Sometimes, the reder Bangalore who invited me for the annual lecture serial in honour of
is slow to grasp the meaning. For instance “O foolish ones, and Bishop Jonas Thaliath the pioneer and founder of Dharmaram
slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken …” Institutions.
It is accepted unquestionably that in our time the historical
understanding of any ancient text is inevitable, and it is not possible Joseph Pamplany
for us to turn our backs on past centuries of historical investigation. Alpha Institute Thalassery,
Today it is our task to re-examine the methods of biblical interpretation Corpus Christi, 2017
and to test them anew. It is often maintained that the historical method
is the only means. On the other hand, it is held that the historical
method leads to antiquarianism or ‘historicism.’ The modern biblical
hermeneutics should address both these aspects of historical End Notes
criticism. 1 Milton S. Terry, Biblical Hermeneutics (Grand Rapids: Zondervan
It is within the Vorlage of this long history that one should approach Publishing House, n.d.) 20
the document Dei Verbum (Word of God), one of only two dogmatic 2 A. Berkeley Mickelsen, Interpreting the Bible (Grand Rapids:
constitutions issued by the Second Vatican Council, the other being Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1963) 5.
Lumen Gentium, the Dogmatic Constitution on the Church. As such 3 Stephen R. Lewis, Hermeneutics: The Study of the
Dei Verbum is one of the most authoritative and important documents Interpretation of Scriptures (Dallas: Chafer Theological
of the Council. Its purpose is to spell out the Church’s understanding Seminary, 2015) 21.
of the nature of revelation, that is, the process whereby God 4 Lewis, Hermeneutics, 21.
10 11
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
As one goes deeply into the history of biblical exegesis one can
subtly notice the unbroken linkage of the tension between the Jewish
and Greek epistemology. The entire Jewish epistemology was built
upon the empirical means of hearing whereas the Greek
Chapter 1 epistemologists stood always on the unshaken foundation of seeing.
In fact, this epistemological difference functions as the hermeneutical
key of Biblical exegesis down through the centuries. The history of
biblical hermeneutics originates with distinctions in the Greek-
Hebrew means of cognition.

Are We Hearing or First Stage: The Aural Hebrew versus the Visual Greek
Seeing the Word of God? Judaism is a religion of sound, not sight; of hearing rather than
seeing; of the word as against the image. The Hebrews did not
The First Phase of Biblical Hermeneutics develop analytical thinking as the Greeks did.2 Israel was a nation
of prophets, not philosophers. Prophets listen to God. Philosophers
envision.3 For the Greek philosopher, intellectual understanding came
through the eye. For the Hebrew prophet, it came through the ear.
The eye sees and dissects. The ear, on the other hand, hears and
obeys. The logic of the Hebrew Scriptures is the logic of revelation.

T
he phrase “biblical criticism” often sounds Even the theophanies were vociphanies, because in those
negative to many people. The word “criticism” theophanies no one had seen the God of Israel but only heard him
is not to be taken in the negative sense of revealing. Rabbi Jonathan Sacks explains this reality succinctly in
attempting to denigrate the Bible, although this motive his article explaining the meaning of the Hebrew verb re’eh.4 The
is found in its history. It is only an umbrella term God encountered by Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, by Moses in the
used to designate the application of the disciplines of burning bush, and by the Israelites as they stood at the foot of Mount
philosophy, literature, history and science to the critical Sinai, came not as an appearance, a visible presence, but as a voice
study of the Bible. F. F. Bruce wrote in the 1970’s, - commanding, promising, challenging, summoning. For the Hebrews
“The value of these critical methods of Bible study lies hearing was a greater epistemological category than seeing.5
in their enabling the reader to interpret the writings as In his comment on Ex 28:10 Philo proposes that God’s logoi,
accurately as possible.”1 There are three obstacles that which are at the same time erga (and not rhemata), are meant to
stand in the way of correctly interpreting the biblical be seen. For Philo, ears are to be converted into eyes. The text of
writings: The first is the linguistic barrier, as the Bible Ex 28:10 says “and the people saw the voices.6
speaks different languages from ours namely Hebrew
and Greek. The second barrier is temporal barrier as Moses insists on this point as he writes: “Then God spoke to you
we live approximately two millennia later, and the third out of the fire. You heard the sound of words, but saw no image;
barrier is eisegesis barrier, as we bring different there was only a voice . . .” The God of Israel, at the heart of reality,
contemporary expectations and explanations into the cannot be reduced to be an object of seeing. The exact meaning of
the irreconcilable severity of the first commandment that prohibits
text.
12 13
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
the making images is due to the difference in this epistemological The vision concerning Judah and Jerusalem that Isaiah son of Amoz
emphasis. Idolatry in the Torah is more than the absurdity of saw during the reigns of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz and Hezekiah, kings
worshipping things we ourselves have made. It is the very idea that of Judah: Hear, O heavens! Listen, O earth! For the LORD has
God is to be identified with anything visible. God is beyond what we spoken: “I reared children and brought them up, but they have
can see – not simply because He is so much greater, vaster, than rebelled against me . . . Hear the word of the LORD, you rulers of
anything our eyes can encompass, but because, as Rabbi Sacks Sodom; listen to the law of our God, you people of Gomorrah!”
observes, God belongs to a different dimension of reality altogether. In this opening verse of the Book, the prophet Isaiah speaks of a
Hence one of the key words of the Book of Deuteronomy which in “vision” that he “saw.” Yet it contains no visual imagery whatsoever.
Hebrew is called Devarim (=”words”) is Shema, (= “Hear” or What Isaiah “sees” is a call, sounds, speech, a proclamation, not a
“Listen”). It is often argued against this view that, in one form or sight or scene or symbol. And again, the key verbs are “hearing”
another, the verb shema appears no less than 92 times where as the and “listening.”
verba videnti occurs only 24 times in the course of the book. Hear
are some of the famous examples: More striking still is an episode in the first chapter of the book of
Jeremiah: The word of the Lord came to me: “What do you see,
• Hear [shema] O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one. If Jeremiah?” “I see the branch of an almond tree,” I replied. The
you surely hear [shamoa tishme’u] the commandments I give Lord said to me, “You have seen correctly, for I am watching to see
you this day, to love the Lord your God and serve him with all that My word is fulfilled.” Jeremiah “sees” an almond tree. This
your heart and all your soul . . . really is a visual image. Yet immediately we discover that what is
• Moses and the Levitical priests spoke to all Israel saying: Pay significant is not the appearance of the tree but the sound of its
attention and listen [shema], Israel . . . name. In Hebrew the word for almond tree, shaked, sounds like
• Listen O heavens and I will speak; earth, hear [ve-tishma] the verb meaning shoked (=”to watch”). The entire passage is a
the words of my mouth. verbal pun. Jeremiah “sees” but God teaches him to listen. Indeed
the text begins and ends with a reference to the divine word: “My
However there are obvious explanations to conclude that seeing word is fulfilled.”
was associated with direct, immediate experience while hearing
See, I am setting before you today a blessing and a curse — the
connected with mediated and secondary experience.7 Job’s response
blessing if you listen to [tishme’u] the commands of the LORD
to the theophany in the whirlwind is an obvious illustration of this
your G-d that I am giving you today; the curse if you do not listen
idea: “I have heard of you by the hearing of my ear, but now my eye
[tishme’u] to the commands of the LORD your G-d and turn from
has seen you” (Job 42:5). The Book of Ezekiel almost equates both
the way that I command you today by following other gods, which
cognitive means of seeing and hearing as he says: “Look with your
you have not known.
eyes and your ears hear …” (Ez 40:2). These conter examples, as
Rabbi Sacks points out, do not deny the priority of hearing in the The text seems to be about seeing. In fact, though, it is about
Hebrew Bible. The verba videnti, for example, Re’eh (= “see”) listening to something heard, namely a blessing and a curse. The non
are also constantly used in the narratives for the description of sequitur is so marked that some English translations render the verb
revelation. If we examine the role of sight in Judaism we discover re’eh not as “see” but as “understand.” In one sense, however,
something strange. Often, when the Torah seems to be using a verb Moses is referring to something visible, as the text goes on to make
or metaphor for sight it is actually referring to something not seen at clear: “When the LORD your God has brought you into the land
all, but rather, heard. One example can be found in the great opening you are entering to possess, you are to proclaim on Mount Gerizim
of the book of Isaiah: the blessings, and on Mount Ebal the curses.”
14 15
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
Later in Devarim this ceremony is specified in greater detail: prophets and priests; ultimately in the words of the Torah itself – the
“When you have crossed the Jordan into the land the Lord your words through which we are to interpret all other words. Why is
God is giving you, set up some large stones and coat them with God revealed in words? Because words are what makes us persons.
plaster. Write on them all the words of this law when you have Language makes homo sapiens unique. Because we have language,
crossed over to enter the land the Lord your G-d is giving you, a we can think. If we try to translate this idea into the Cartesian
land flowing with milk and honey, just as the Lord, the G-d of your terminology it sounds like Audio ergo sum.
fathers, promised you. And when you have crossed the Jordan, set
We can ask questions. Human beings are the only species known
up these stones on Mount Ebal, as I command you today, and coat
them with plaster . . .” to us in the universe capable of asking questions, because we can
speak as well as see, we can imagine a universe unlike the one we
On the same day Moses commanded the people: “When you have seen every day until now. We can dream dreams, imagine
have crossed the Jordan, these tribes shall stand on Mount Gerizim alternatives, sketch utopias, formulate plans, construct intentions.
to bless the people: Simeon, Levi, Judah, Issachar, Joseph and Because of language – and only because of language – we are free
Benjamin. And these tribes shall stand on Mount Ebal to pronounce and therefore morally responsible agents.
curses: Reuben, Gad, Asher, Zebulun, Dan and Naphtali.” Both
procedures – setting up the engraved stones, and the blessings and The idea so popular among neo-Darwinians and socio-biologists
curses recited on the two mountains – are designed to give visual that we are no more than “naked apes” is a fundamental error. To
impact to an essentially auditory experience. Seeing, in Judaism, is be sure, we share 98 per cent of our genes with the primates, but it
ultimately about hearing. Israel is the people called on to reject images is the other 2 per cent that counts. There are small differences that
in favour of words; to discard appearances and follow, instead, the make all the difference – and it is language that makes the difference.
commanding voice. We are human because we can speak and can therefore be held
accountable for keeping or failing to keep our word. Language does
No concept has proved more difficult to explain in modern times more than allow us to make plans. It allows us to communicate.
than the doctrine of Torah min hashamayim (“Torah from heaven”). Words create and solve one problem in particular. They create the
The reason is that it has not been understood in the depth it demands. problem of loneliness (known in philosophy as solipsism). Animals
It is not simply about the Divine authorship of the Pentateuch, nor is are conscious, but only human beings are self-conscious. Only human
it merely a statement about its authority. First and foremost it is an beings can articulate the difference between “I” and “you” and know
answer to the ultimate human question: Where do we find God? the abyss that lies between us.
Judaism’s answer is that God is found, first and foremost, not in God reveals Himself in speech. That is the revolutionary doctrine
the blinding light of the sun, nor in the majesty of mountains. He is known as Torah min hashamayim, “Torah from heaven.” God is
not in the almost infinitely vast spaces of the universe, with its hundreds to be found in holiness, and the source, the template, the matrix of
of billions of galaxies, each with hundreds of billions of stars. He is holiness is speech. All religions have holy places, holy objects, holy
not even in the letters of the genetic code, which the human genome
times, holy people. But in Judaism these are derivative not primary.
project scientists have decoded, that give all life its structure and
diversity. If this is where you seek God, says Judaism, we are looking Things are holy only because God has said so. Judaism is the religion
in the wrong place. Indeed the mistake we are making consists in of holy words.
the very fact that you are looking at all. Judaism is the single greatest statement in the history of civilization
God is to be found not by looking but by listening. He lives in that personhood is at the heart of being – that it is not random,
words – the words He spoke to the patriarchs and matriarchs, accidental, or peripheral that we are persons; that we can speak
16 17
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
and listen; that we can communicate and be communicated with. vision. It is noteworthy that Greek has but one verb for hearing
Only human beings can grasp the concept of the holy, that which is (akouo), but at least ten verbs of seeing. This penchant for vision is
defined in and through a relationship with God. Our relationship the result of Greek philosophical stress on the connection between
with God is personal, therefore verbal, a matter of speech. G-d as perception and reality. The Greek notion of “seeing is believing”
He is in Himself is beyond us; but G-d in relationship with humanity
begins with the assumption that observation is the true path for
goes to the core of our humanity and is therefore expressed in words.
assessing reality. Observation is fundamental to the Greek view of
If you seek God, turn your attention to language – not to people, the world. In fact, theoria (the basis of our idea of “theory”) is
places or objects. The hidden presence of God is everywhere. But directly associated with examination by observation. The Greek
the revealed presence of God is in the words He gave to humanity mind is the mind set apart from the object of inquiry. To see is to
on the basis of which He made a series of covenants. The Mosaic
see from a distance, to draw a line between subject and object.
books constitute the covenant binding heaven and earth, God and
mankind. Hence the philosophy of Israel – so different from that of Even the Greek gods maintain the aloof position of the spectator.
ancient Greece, the European Enlightenment and contemporary NT and the Greek Idea of Seeing
science: To meet God is to listen to God.
NT is predominantly following the Greek idea of esteeming vision
The Greek “Seeing Culture:” over audition as the means of cognition. This is mainly due to the
The Greek philosophers were among the first to understand the theological shift from hearing to seeing. God of the OT was a God
new power of the written word. The ancient philosophers made a of hearing. However, in the fullness of time God decided to incarnate
radical distinction between the cognitive categories of audition and in the person of Jesus, the Son God. The historic Christ-event could
vision. Anaxagores argued that the unmoved air is disturbed by the be understood as the root cause for the paradigm shift from hearing
sound that produces an echo within the ear of the hearer, which in to seeing. In what follows, as a case study, we will analyse the use
turn will produce another echo within the internal air system of the
of the various verba videnti in the gospel of John.
hearer resembling to the echo exerted by the external sound.8
Empodoclus compared the eye to a lantern and ear to a bell that Review of the Verbs of Seeing
produces rembling echo to any sound come to it.9 Plato also
understood sound as the blow that causes echo within the blood, Though the fourth gospel makes an emphatic assertion in the
mind and soul of the hearer.10 This brief survey gives the hint that the prologue that no one has seen God, seeing is an important verb in
Greek philosophers inavariably reduced the importance of hearing understanding Johannine theology. There are forms from the five
by emphasizing the echoic or resounding nature of original sound. verbs used in the gospel of John to indicate sight: horao, eidon,
Plato did not just hear words; he saw them. He knew words as theoreo, theaomai, blepo. Among these verbs it is difficult to discern
ideas, detached from life and taking on a life of their own. Our how many of these forms were used by the evangelist with distinct
word idea comes ultimately from the Greek word “to see.” Our theological nuances. Sometimes these verbs are used as synonyms
word theory comes from the Greek word theoria, meaning ‘a sight’ for faith while in certain other occasions they are used to describe
(of something seen). An idea is a concept you can see in your mind. the conditions for faith. However, there are a number of instances in
The Greeks are a people of the eye, and seeing is important to which these verbs are used for mere ocular vision without any specific
them. It has strong significance in their religion, which is a religion of relation to faith.
18 19
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
1
Verbs LXX Mt Mk Lk Jn 1, 2, 3 Jn Rev NT total seeing are used to present certain type of seeing. In fact blepo is
blepo 130 20 15 15 17 1 13 132 almost always used to designate physical or earthly seeing. But in
9:39 the evangelist uses it for spiritual seeing (oi‘ mh. ble,pontej
theaomai 8 4 2 3 6 3 - 22
ble,pwsin kai. oi‘ ble,pontej tufloi. ge,nwntai). Such a concluding
theoreo 56 2 7 7 24 1 2 58 statement becomes the hermeneutical key to explain the whole
eidon 930 58 42 42 36 3 56 336 pericope (9:1-41). In fact, through this ‘entrapment technique’ John
highlights his fundamental theology that all forms of seeing are meant
horao 520 13 7 14 31 8 7 114
for the deepening of one’s faith. The visibility of the sign should
Total 1644 97 73 81 114 16 78 662 always lead to the invisibility. Materiality must lead to spirituality. In
other words, the evangelist is trying to overcome the dichotomy
between materiality and spirituality. For John, sight without faith is
2.4 Seeing (blepo) as Reader Entrapment blindness and it will not bring salvation (Jn 9:36-39).19 D. A. Hanger
Scholars had pointed out the Johannine rhetoric strategy of ‘reader is right when he reasons, John does not make any apparent distinction
entrapment,’12 i.e., the author narrates the context in such a way between the physical and spiritual vision.20 Because for him the
spiritual has become physical through incarnation. The incarnated
that the reader is led to expect a certain conclusion of the scene. But one can be seen and experienced through the senses. Hence, all our
the evangelist with a master skill astonishes the reader by presenting attempts to divide between physical and spiritual seeing in the fourth
a diametrically opposed conclusion. For example, in Jn 4, the gospel would end up in vain.
circumstances are described in such a way that the reader, who is
2.6 Seeing (theoreo) as Mediated Seeing
familiar with the type scene (Gen 32:1-25), will definitely conclude
that Jesus is going to marry the Samaritan woman. In fact, Jesus The fact of seeing God’s glory in Christ is an ongoing process of
questions her marital status and invites her for conversion.13 Botha growing to faith. It is indicated in 6:40. Here, seeing (theoreo) the
calls this phenomenon as reader entrapment14 while Staley calls this Son is a necessary step to faith but it is not the whole process. It
must lead him to genuine faith, which will make one worthy of
rhetorical strategy ‘the victimization of the implied reader.’’15 The resurrection and eternal life. It is presented as Father’s will. This is
narrator first presents to the reader a set of narrative facts in such a emphatically stated again in 12:45 in the reverse order. One who
way that the reader is induced to commit characters’ or narrator’s sees (theoreo) Jesus, sees (theoreo) the Father. The one who has
errors, then he forces the reader to recognize his or her misjudgments not been ever seen by anyone can only be seen through the one
by supplying or implying the corrective perspective.16 Admittedly, who is sent, so also no one can believe in the Father without believing
Kysar explains this rhetoric strategy as the deliberate attempt of the in the Son. An evident attempt is made by the evangelist to bridge
evangelist to make the reader think that he/she understands the gulf between seeing and believing. According to 14:17, not only
everything, but then he/she is left behind struggling to keep up with that the Father is not seen by anyone but the Spirit of truth also is
not seen (theoreo) by the world. But the disciples are granted with
the temporal flow of the discourse.17 The victimization of the reader the privilege of the possibility of knowing him. But the possibility is
is intended to bring the reader closer to the truth. to be actualised through genuine faith that leads to indwelling of the
A similar literary technique might be found in the Johannine usage Spirit and real union with God.
of verba videndi.18 The evangelist presents the verbs of seeing in In 17:24, Jesus prays for the disciples so that they may be with
such a way that he forces the reader to believe that certain verbs of him to see (qewre,w) his glory which the Father has given him. It is
20 21
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
worthy to note that the verb used in the prologue for seeing is words are insufficient to communicate (apophatic) this experience
qea,omai, where the glory is seen as a spectacle, where the act of of unity. Seeing plays an important role in this circumstance.
seeing does not involve a complete insight into its significance. But Chatelion Counet argues that fourth gospel is a methexis of the
the prayer in John 17 implies something higher than the self-attribution revelation experienced in Jesus Christ. According to him ‘seeing’
of the prologue.21 The derivative theoros (qewro,j = an observer the do,xa as well as the risen Lord, in the fourth gospel, can only
send to the war field to give report (theoreo) of the happenings) happen in the form of Methexis i.e., “by bringing the act of
according to Chatelion Counet points to the deeper meaning of interpretation and speech to an end and by trusting an apophatic
theoreo (qewre,w).22 The way that theoreo (qewro,j) sees is the understanding to which the text invites you.”29 This transcended
official version of the events (theory). While the version of an seeing according to Chatelion Counet belongs to the ‘unreadable
unauthorised independent reader remains as mere perception part’ or the part that ‘cannot be rewritten.’ For example, the aorist
(aesthesia). Thus qewre,w can be understood as a kind of seeing etheosametha (evqeasa,meqa) in 1:14- we have seen his glory) cannot
where the central position is occupied not by the observer but by be made present ‘in any present situation at least not without
the one for whom he observes, the one who sent him to observe.23 mediation.30 Here, the seeing is the ultimate word. Hence, he argues
Thus qewre,w involves an aspect of mediated seeing. that the sublime form of seeing occurs in the context of non-word or
One looks with eyes of another according to the values, the what is seen becomes the ultimate word. While seeing the glory (
expectations and mission of the other and this determines and do,xa,) which is a non-word, we also recognise that it is the ultimate
influences what one sees. Qewrei/n in the sense of “insight” or word to express the quality of the Father and the Son. This is exactly
“thinking through” has this added meaning of mediation.24 what happens while seeing the risen Lord.31 Here, what is seen is
This mediator role once again confirms that (theoreo)is not the not merely an object or sign but the content is contained in the sign.
ultimate seeing, but only a step towards it.25 It is not merely an ocular Hence, seeing the risen Lord is a Methexis (me,qexij,) which is beyond
perception, rather, the evangelist is emphasising the importance of words. This experience is the privilege of the apostolic community.
the event of following Jesus by the sublime verb qea,omai. Only by But for the future generation, it is granted through words (20:29).
disregarding the importance of the theme of discipleship in the fourth The Seeing and Hearing Cultures Intersect
gospel, one can argue that it is merely an ocular perception. In 11:5, Eventually Greek “seeing” culture and the Hebrew “hearing”
Brown’s conclusion is based on the wrong presupposition that faith culture met each other. Philo a Hellenistic Jew from Alexandrea,
based on signs is degraded faith.26 Moreover, the ambiguity in the tried to bridge the gulf between Hebrew and Greek thinking. He
use of qea,omai can be better understood from the narrative point would use allegory as one such bridge. Allegory was a way of
of view. It is substantiated by the notion of theaomai (qea,omai) as understanding Scripture that sought deeper meanings behind literal
methexis. texts. Philo felt that allegory was the way that the Greek mind, with
2.9 Seeing (theaomai) as Methexis its thoughts about an ideal realm of reason and logic, and the Hebrew
Methexis is derived from metecho (which means ‘I participate’) mind, with its thoughts of heaven, could connect.
is a technical term used by Plato to designate the sharing and In popular Christian circles the dictum “seeing is believing” is
participation of things in ideas.27 Philip Wheelwright introduces the often opposed to faith. We think of faith as believing without seeing,
concept of methexis into the field of literary criticism to express the sometimes even associating faith with the impossibility of seeing.
special relationship between the image and what is imagined.28 In But it is certain that we have not given much thought to the cultural
methexis the signified is not only imitated but also present. Hence, influence necessitating this distinction or on the aphorism itself. Why
do we tie seeing with justified true belief?
22 23
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
Endnotes Scholars, 1988, pp. 95-123; ID., Reading With a Passion: Rhetoric,
1 F.F. Bruce, “Biblical Exegesis and Hermeneutics,” The New Encyclopedia Autobiography, And American West in the Gospel of John, New York,
Britannica, 1977, 7:63. Continuum, 1995, pp. 2940.
2 For details see, Bonnie Howe, Joel B. Green (eds.), Cognitive Linguistic 16 J. O‘NIEL, The Experience of Error: Ironic Entrapment in Augastan
Explorations in Biblical Studies (Boston: Walter de Gruyter, 2014) Narrative Structure,in PLL 18 (1982) pp. 278-280.
3 See, Thorleif Bomann, Hebrew Thought Compared With Greek (New 17 R. KYSAR, Johannine Metaphor - Meaning and Function: A Literary
York: Norton, 1970), 206. Case Study of John 10:1-8, in Semeia 53 (1991) 81-111, p. 94.
4 Rabbi Jonathan Sacks, “re’eh – Seeing and Hearing,” Covenant and 18 For this observation, I am debted to my promoter Prof. Dr. Reimund
Conversation (London: SCM, 2008) 232. Bieringer.
5 For a counter argument see, Michael Carasik, Theologies of Mind in 19 DECONICK, Voice of the Mystics, p. 127.
Biblical Israel SBL -85 (Atlanta, SBL, 2008) and Yael Avrahami, The 20 D. A. HANGER, The Vision of God in Philo and John, in JETS 14 (1971)
Senses of scripture: Sensory Perception in the Hebrew Bible 8194, p. 92.
(Bloomsbury: T&T Clark, 2011) argue for the centrality of sight in Hebrew
epistemology. 21 The same verb (qea,omai) is used in 1:38 (Jesus sees the first disciples);
4:35 (Jesus invites the disciples to see the field ready for harvest; 6:5
6 Gildas Hamel, “Seeing and hearing in the Bible,” (Jesus sees the great multitude in need of bread) and 11:45 (seeing -
7 See Bonnie Howe, Joel B. Green (eds.), Cognitive Linguistic qeasa,menoi - Jesus raising Lazarus many believed in him. Cf. CROSS,
Explorations, 32. Faith and Vision, p.90.
8 Aet. 4.19.5. See, W.K.C. Guthrie, History of Greek Philosophy (Cambridge: 22 CHATELIONCOUNET, Postmodern Gospel, p. 304.
Cambridge University Press, 1965 ), 2:224.
23 CHATELION COUNET, Postmodern Gospel, p. 305.
9 Aet. 4.19.5. See, Guthrie, History of Greek Philosophy, 2:238.
24 CHATELION COUNET, Postmodern Gospel, p. 305. He points out that this
10 Thimaeus, 67b. idea of seeing is found in the present day scientific philosophical thought
11This statistics is based on R. Morgenthaler, Statitik des of Karl Popper, who argues that theory shows us reality. A simple
Neutestamentlichen Wortschatzes, Zurich – Frankfurt, Gotthelf Verlag, observation without any prejudice that coincide with reality is an illusion.
1992. However, this statistics must be evaluated in the light of their We always see things with presupposed theories, i.e., never see reality
proportionality. Otherwise, it might mislead. in itself unmediated. K. POPPER, Objective Knowledge an Evolutionary
12 J. E. BOTHA, Reader Entrapment as Literary Device in John 4:1-42, in Approach, Oxford, Clarendon, 1972, p. 344.
Neotestamentica, 24 (1990) 37-47, p. 37. 25 CHATELION COUNET, Postmodern Gospel, p. 305.
13 Though the terrm ‘reader entrapment’ is used by J. E. Botha (see below),
the whole theme of the allusion of the betrothal type scene in Jn 4, is 26 For a detailed description of this theme see the sections: Theological
discussed in L. ESLINGER, The Wooing of the Woman at the Well: The Dispute, p. 63, Faith and Signs, p. 91. Again, the importance of qea,omai
Reader and Reader Response Criticism, in Journal of Literature and is degraded on basis of the fact that in 1:32 and 34 qea,omai and o‘ra,w
Theology 1 (1987) 167-183. are used interchangeably. But 1:32 is the actual description of the event
while 1:34 is only the affirmation of what is seen in 1:32, so there is no
14 J. E. BOTHA, Reader Entrapment, p. 37; for similar approaches, see, C. M. contradiction in affirming the superiority of this verb.
CARMICHAEL, Marriage and the Samaritan Woman, in NTS 26 (1980)
332346;L. ELSINGER, The Wooing of the Women at the Well, p. 183; J. G. 27 PLATO, Parmenides, Cambridge, MS, Harvard University, 1987, § 132d,
WILLIAMS, The Beautiful and the Barren: Conventions in Biblical Type §141d.
Scenes, in JSOT 17 (1980) 113-115; D. SEELEY, Deconstructing the New 28 P. WHEELWRIGHT, p. 116; CHATELION COUNET, Postmodern Gospel, p. 123.
Testament (BIS, 5), Leiden-New York- Köln, Brill, 1994; pp. 106-122.
29 CHATELION COUNET, Postmodern Gospel, p. 283.
15 The term ‘victimisation of the reader’ is first used by John McKee. Cf.
JOHN MCKEE, Literary Irony and the Literary Audience: Studies in the 30 CHATELION COUNET, Postmodern Gospel, p. 271.
Victimisation of the Reader in Augastan Fiction, Amsterdam, 1974, p. 31 Even though John does not use the verb qea,omai for the seeing of the
29; J. L. STALEY, The Prints First Kiss: A Rhetorical Investigation of the risen Lord, the identification of the content and object takes place in the
Implied Reader in the Fourth Gospel (SBLDS, 82), Atlanta, Georgia, seeing of the risen Lord.

24 25
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
schools. The school at Alexandria was indeed a structure much like
that which the word “school” connotes - “a scholastic institution,
properly organized and placed under the patronage and supervision
of the local bishop.”3 The school at Antioch was, indeed, different
because it lacked the hierarchy of authority. Antioch’s school
Chapter 2 comprised of merely a group who were united by their common
theology and exegesis.4 The second stage in the history of Biblical
hermeneutics is certainly the patristic era. From 100- 400 A.D., the
heart of the patristic era, the seeing and hearing cultures both existed
within the church.5 Before discussing the differences between the
two Schools, we should take note of the following remarks:
Antiochian and 1. Usually scholars speak of the controversy between the two
Alexandrean Schools schools, ignoring that they agreed on many points. Every
school had its own aspects but was not isolated from the other.
The Second Phase of Biblical Hermeneutics
2. The problem issued not from the two schools, but from those
who misinterpreted these Schools’ concepts or formulas, like
Apollinarius, Eutyches, Diodore, Nestorius, Theodore of
Mopsuestia, Theodoret of Cyrus, and Ibas of Edessa. It is
noteworthy that Apollinarius of Laodicea and Eutyches of
Constantinople who accepted the Alexandrian formula “Mia-

T
he patristic scholars often declared the “letter” physis” were not Alexandrian, nor had they the Alexandrian
unable to make any sense, and called the lack system of theology.
of an acceptable interpretation a “missing”
littera. For Origen such cases, rare as they may be, 3. The imperial and church politics played their role in this
are a direct invitation to search for an allegorical controversy to create a huge gap between the leaders of these
comment: How would you literally apply Ex 21:24 “eye schools, which ended with the serious split that occurred within
for eye, tooth for tooth, when a new born (without the Church from the fifth century.
teeth!) is murdered? or how could you take Jesus by 4. There is a growing tendency among the historians to dismiss
his word: “Don’t greet anybody on your way” (Lk patristic exegesis in general as just mere compilation of
10:4)? Many generations after Origen, John allegories. Indeed the whole notion of “allegory” has a pivotal
Chrysostom would express the common understanding role in patristic exegesis. The difficulty with the word, as Guzie
about such cases: “We interpret some passages by points out, is that it is a highly analogous term, perhaps even
the letter, others with a meaning different from the literal, equivocal.6
others again as literal and figurative.”1
Alexandrean Allegorical Approach: Hearing Culture
The period lasting from the Council of Nicaea until
the Council of Chalcedon in 451 is considered by some Alexandrean exegetes, mainly Philo and Clement, believed that
scholars to be the “golden age of patristic exegesis”2 each word in the Biblical text was chosen for a precise reason.
due to the presence of Alexandrean and Antiochian According to them the meaning of the sacred Word is hidden on the
26 27
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
surface of the text. Deification, which is the core of Alexandrian this type of understanding – theöria or contemplation – which is not
theology means the renewal of human nature as a whole, to attain different from the allegorical method.
sharing in the characteristics of our Lord Jesus Christ in place of the Two important advantages are often pointed out for the allegorical
corrupt human nature, or “the partaking in the divine nature” (2 Pet
method: First, it makes the continuity between the OT, the moment
1:4). The core of the Alexandrian theology can be revealed through
of Christ, and the time of the Church. Second, Christ is the transformation
St. Athanasius’ statement that the Word of God became man
(enethraposen) so that we might be made gods (theopiethomen). of history; He is the exegete of the OT, who gives a definitive meaning
As the literal sense is understood as something related to the surface to all that happened before Him and to all that will ever happen. The
meaning, Alexandrians believed that their interpretations must open patristic approach could be compared to the redaction-criticism which
up the symbolic language used in the text. Proper interpretation, which makes its starting point the scriptural text and wants to turn up what the
according to Alexandrian thought would disregard the unimportant text, in its historical context, says about the mystery of God in Christ.
surface details, came as the result of allegorical reading.7 Alexandrians Patristic exegesis takes as its starting point the Christian’s relation to the
believed the text to be “pregnant with meaning.”8 This true, spiritual mystery of which the text speaks. Thus scientific exegesis begins with a
meaning centers on Christ, and, in the eyes of the Alexandrians, each text which speaks of a mystery; patristic spiritual exegesis begins with
page of the Biblical text must point toward the presence of Christ. the mystery spoken of in the text.
Allegory is basically a technique, a method of interpretation; and Modern exegetes are free from the Neoplatonic theory of
as a technique, it is the patristic analogue of any of the techniques of inspiration which saw every letter of the text as inspired; “and so we
literary criticism we use today. This literary strategy is not unique to are not tempted to go the Alexandrian route of seeking Christ in every
the Patristic writers. As Tad W. Guzie observes, word of the OT. Antioch too wanted to control the choice of symbols.
But the Antiochian exegetes shared with the Alexandrians the technique
Greek philosophers, for example, allegorized the Iliad and the of allegory; they used the same method under a different name, a
Odyssey, drawing moral applications from the Homeric stories and method which works with resemblances between words, events, and
other myths for the edification of schoolchildren. Philo allegorized figures; only the Antiochians made the criteria for resemblance so
the OT accounts, drawing transcendental or philosophical meanings strict that types had to correspond in great material detail before they
from them; the material details of the Passover ritual or of the story would be accepted as genuine types.”10 It is obvious that the differences
of creation, for instance, become symbols of the soul and its virtues. between the Alexandrian and Antiochene school was in a way a revival
The Fathers do this type of philosophical allegorizing, and they do a of the old tension that existed between the congnitive methodologies
great deal of it.9 that existed among the Jewish and Greek perception.
Besides these common purposes the patristic writers used the Clement of Alexandria (155-216) in Stromateis, (vi. 124.6, II.
technique of allegory at another level, to produce a different type of 494) dstinguishes between five meanings of the Bible:
content, historical and theological rather than philosophical or a. Historical (taking stories in the OT as actual historical events
transcendental. This is what critics of the allegorical method have b. Doctrinal (the moral and theological teachings of the Bible)
often failed to observe, reducing allegory to one meaning (usually c. Prophetic (types and prophecies)
pejorative) rather than seeing the various levels of meaning which
d. Philosophical (allegories in natural objects and historical
the word has in the patristic writings themselves. In fact the patristic
persons, e.g., Sarah and Hagar represent true wisdom and
approach is the continuation of the literary strategy used by the NT
writers who compared the type and antitype: Christ as the new Adam, pagan philosophy).
the second Moses, the new Melchizedek. The exegetes of Antioch, e. Mystical (seeking the deeper moral and spiritual religious
at the end of the fourth century, wanted to use a different word for truths symbolized by events or persons)

28 29
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
Origen (ca. 185-254), another important figure of the the formulation of the opposing hermeneutic principles, which was
Alexandrean school reasoned that since the Bible is full of enigmas, initially centered in Antioch.
parables, dark sayings, and moral problems, the meaning must be Antiochean Literal Approach: Seeing Culture
found at a deeper level. He saw a threefold meaning in Scripture
(literal, moral, and spiritual/allegorical) This threefold sense is also As Frances Young states, the principal representatives of
suggested Proverbs 22:20-21 and 1 Thessalonians 5:23 by the body Antiochene theology were Diodore of Tarsus, the teacher of John
(literal), soul (moral), and spirit (allegorical). However, Origen was Chrysostom, Theodore of Mopsuestia and Theodoret of Cyrrhus,
interested in determining the original text of Scripture, as indicated the friend and defender of Nestorius. The reputation of all three has
by his production of the Hexapla. suffered through association with Nestorianism, but there has been
a reassessment in modern times, not least of the theology of Nestorius
Following the Jewish cognitive approaches that emphasizes himself.12
hearing over seeing, Alexandrian hermeneutics as popularized by
Against the Jewish approach of the Alexandrian hermeneutics,
Origen, introduced the allegorical method of interpretation. Just as
the Antiochene interpretation is basically Greek in its approach. They
the Jewish approach did, Alexandrian hermeneutics looks at Bible envisioned the text in three categories namely, literal, historical and
in three levels: first, the literal meaning; second, the moral meaning; linguistic. Antiochene interpreters insisted on the historical reliability of
and third, the spiritual meaning. As the seeing aspect is ignored, the the Bible, because the seeing aspect is important for them. The deeper
historical context of the text is set aside. Moreover, those who meaning of the Scripture is elicited when one pays attention to the
practice Alexandrian hermeneutics believe that the spiritual meaning historical context of the text. Thus, they greatly reject the thought of
of the Scriptures is hidden and they should be heard repeatedly and “hidden meanings.” What is intended as meaning is seen in the text.
interpreted. This allegorical interpretation, according to Origen, Theodore of Mopsuestia advocated the study of the passage within
would retain the authority of the Bible and at the same time minimize its context and not to draw interpretation out from an isolated verse.
the embarrassment brought by difficult passages. The exegete will
observe how the words were used, and will compare similar texts The Antiochian school reacted against the Alexandrean Allegorical
when one is literal and the other is spiritual. approach and underscored the historicity of the Bible, namely that
the latter consists of texts written by individuals to others at a given
The “hearing” culture predominated over the “seeing” culture. time of human history in the specific language as well as mindset of
When the people read the Bible, they sensed there had to be that time. For example, Theodore of Mopsuestia (ca. 350-ca. 428)
something more than just words on paper. They expected to who has been called the "prince of ancient exegetes," in the last of
experience the Living God in the text. In Alexandria, Origen and his his five books, "On Allegory and History Against Origen," asked,
followers played freely with allegory, following Philo’s example. if Adam were not really Adam how did death enter the human race?
Allegorical excesses came to plague biblical studies for centuries.
“Allegorical interpretation of Scripture allowed an entirely As Paul Nadim Tarazi observes, in the Antiochean approach, a
Christological reading of the Old Testament, so that . . . historical given text can have only the one meaning intended by its author.
vicissitudes of Israel or details of the biblical account of creation One should note here that the case of double-meaning in some
held no interests in themselves.”11 Notable exegetes of the time passages is not to be equated with two meanings; indeed: (a) the
included Origen of Alexandria, the great allegorist (c. 185-254). In former radically differs from the latter in that it is still considered to
the eastern Mediterranean there was Diodorus of Tarsus, Theodore be addressed to the same reader and not to two different kinds of
of Mopsuestia (c. 350-428) and John Chrysostom (c. 345-407). readers as in the allegorical approach; (b) the exegete is to clearly
The excessive spiritualism of the Alexandrian school, in turn, prompted prove that a given biblical author is intending the double-meaning in
a given text. Theodore of Mopsuestia, one Antiochene writer,
30 31
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
explains his frustration with theAlexandrian practice of allegory: “When exegesis of the Gospels and Epistles to take chiefly into consideration
they start expounding divine Scripture ‘spritually’ – ‘spiritual interpretation’ the historical Jesus, the aim and the end of the history of Israel, in
is the name they like to give their folly – they claim that Adam is not the full reality of his human nature. Antiochians met severe problem
Adam, paradise is not paradise, the serpent not the serpent.”13 with their non-Christological interpretation of the Old Testament.
The Antiochean school, for instance, explains the double-meaning The Christological perspective, which shaped this school’s method
of the verb “to be lifted up” as used by the evangelist John and of interpretation, was that the humanity of Christ was not altered by
which means both “to be lifted up upon the cross” as well as “to be his divinity. Their rejection of allegorical methods led to a rejection
lifted up in glory.” Tarazi also adds, if the Antiochians insisted on the of the idea that the Old Testament referred directly to Christ and an
correctness of such an approach, it was not, as it is for many a adherence to the idea that the Old Testament prophecies were rooted
modern biblical scholar, a question of technicality, but the reason in their own culture. However, this is not the outright denial of the
was rather and foremost theological. To be sure, the Bible is not a fulfillment theory. For example, although Eusebius of Caesarea, one
philosophical treatise on the subject “Godhead and manhood and of the major proponents of this school restricted the case of futuristic
their relationship,” but rather, a witness to God’s actions in the realm fulfillment in Christ, he did allow for the idea that some prophecies
of human history culminating with Jesus of Nazareth, God incarnate. find fulfillment in Christ only.15
Thus, biblical exegesis cannot have as its premise an abstract Thus, in their exegesis, the Antiochians took seriously creation as
Godhead - that actually never existed nor ever will! - but the man well as time and space, which it entails, not so much due to a more
Jesus, son of Mary, flesh of her flesh, who lived in first century scientific and realistic stand. Consequently, they emphasized the
Palestine and who spoke first century Palestinian Aramaic and very humanity of Jesus, and thus his historical being and in whom as such,
possibly first century Hellenistic Greek. It is this historical Jesus who i.e. as human being, God was revealed. The outcome of such an
is the Son of God and through whom we get to know this living approach, as Paul Nadim Tarazi points out, was that the Bible was
God. It is the Spirit of this historical Jesus who opens for us the not for them the eternal Word of God - abstraction of abstractions,
door toward a personal relationship with this personal God and not for, whom would God be addressing in eternity?16 Thus the
with an abstract Godhead. It is the flesh and blood apostles of this Antiochians cherished them by studying them, searching them and
flesh and blood Jesus who preached, not to human generations at digging into them with the intention of seeking Jesus, their bread of
large, but the men and women who lived around them in first century life. They sought him by day and in the night-watches, leaning their
Asia, Africa, and Europe, speaking to them, not in some sort of magical head as well as heart over the text, knowing that he will meet them
language, but in the actual languages spoken in those different areas at in it and hoping that it will be sooner than later. They sought him, I
that time. TheAntiochene tradition represents one of the earliest attempts said, because they knew that they were not dealing with an eternally
to employ the historical critical method of interpreting Scripture. present abstract Godhead triggered by an ‘inward’ search of one’s
Following the seeing culture, the Antiochians adopted the theory soul, but rather the historically crucified, dead and resurrected Jesus
of “indwelling” not just as a contrast to the Alexandrian theology of who, as the living and thus free Lord, made Himself present to them
the hypostatic union, but in harmony with their interest in the historic by coming to them as He did among His disciples in the early church.
gramatical method of the exegesis of the Holy Scriptures. As John Chrysostom, another important Atiochian pillar whose
Meyedorff says: “The rigorist critical approach of men like Diodore exegesis is available to us through life-giving homilies also starts his
of Tarsus, Theodore of Mopsuestia, and Theodoret led them to exegesis with a christologcal motive. Like any other Antiochian, he
study the Gospel text literally in order to describe the history of our took seriously the humanity of Jesus, i.e. His having been man. By
salvation rather than to explain it.”14 Since they maintained a literal this I mean that they gave full heed to the fact that Jesus Himself, the
interpretation of the Old Testament, the Antiochenes tended, in their Son of God and God, took extremely seriously the human beings
32 33
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
by becoming one of them. This Christological notion led them to the seems to intend that Jesus actually did these things. An allegorical
recognition of human dignity. Thus, Antiochians viewed every human sense might be added to this without at all contradicting the reality
being not as a symbolic reflection of an abstract Godhead, but rather and truth and factuality of the first literal sense. St. John, or the Holy
as a real image of the man Jesus who is God. This meant that every Spirit through St. John, might also wish to teach us something like,
human being was divinely valuable, yes every human being including “God can use common, even grubby, stuff to bring about healing in
the poor, the needy, the sick and the down-trodden with whom our lives. Don’t doubt him even if it looks like He’s throwing mud in
Jesus associated Himself in the same vein as His Father who, through your face.” Now, the Antiochene school tended to look at the first
the Old Testament prophets, took in His own hands the case of the sense and stop there; the Alexandrian school tended to neglect the
poor, the needy, the widow, the orphan, the alien and those who likely intention of the author of the text and just apply symbolic
suffered injustice.17 This explains why St John Chrysostom meanings to everything.
uncompromisingly stood for such human beings in Antioch as well 2. Second case: Genesis creation account. Taken at “face
as in Constantinople, in his homilies as well as in his attitudes, to the value” so that we believe the author to intend what the words actually
extent that he even paid with his own life for such a stand. say, no more no less, the text poses contradictions (day before the
Those who thought with the logic of revelation sought to hear sun) that any child would pick up on. Not a problem for the Church
God’s Voice in the text, but those who thought with the logic tried to fathers like Augustine because they understood that “literal” does
analyze the text as well. not mean “face value”, but rather “what the author was trying to
Our survey makes the following factors obvious: A difference say.” Getting bogged down in how many years does a “day” represent
began to arise in their minds between a “spiritual” (reading the Bible is totally aside from the point if that wasn’t the author’s point. If the
in such a way as to listen to and experience the Voice of God) and author is trying to use seven days to show, say, seven strata of creation
a “literal” (reading of the written words without having an experience - from the most primordial (light and darkness) to the most intelligent
of the Person of God) reading of a text. Attempts were made at (animals and humans) to the most sublime (resting with God) - well,
historical criticism during the patristic era. The exegetes of ancient then that allegory is the “literal meaning” in the Church father’s
Antioch, are the champions of a historical-grammatical approach in understanding. Any spiritual interpretations have to be built off of
the ancient world.18 The notable exegetes of the West are Ambrose that, rather than off of some other interpretation.
(c. 340-397), Jerome (c. 340-420), Augustine (354-430) and The most renowned intellectual institution in the early Christian
Gregory the Great (c. 540-604). world was undoubtedly the Catechetical School (Didascaleion) of
Having established the literal meaning, which we might also call the Alexandria, and its primary concern was the study of the Bible,
historical meaning - the meaning meant by the historical author - it becomes giving its name to an influential tradition of scriptural interpretation.
easier to see spiritual and allegorical senses and to judge their validity. If The preoccupation of this school of exegesis was to discover
we confuse the senses, or the meaning of “literal sense” in the first place, everywhere the spiritual sense underlying the written word of the
our whole interpretation becomes hopeless convoluted. Scripture. However, the Anthiochian school on the other hand and
the western church remained suspicious of philosophy. This is not to
Let’s consider two cases. suggest that it lacked great minds - individuals like Diodore of Tarsus,
1. First: the incident of Jesus rubbing mud on the eyes of a Theodore of Mopsuestia, Theodoret, Ambrose, Augustine and
blind man in order to restore his sight. The literal sense in this case is Jerome were all great intellectual leaders. These leaders all shared
that Jesus rubbed mud on the eyes of a blind man and thereby restored the belief that the logic of grammar is not the same as the logic of
his sight, though he might have done so in a thousand ways. St. John revelation. Their attitude toward reason, therefore, was one of faith
seeking understanding.
34 35
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
Endnotes
1 In Ps 9. 4.
2 Gerald Bray, Biblical Interpretation: Past and Present (Downers Grove,
IL: Intervarsity Press, 1996), 451.
3 Manlino Simonetti, Biblical Interpretation in the Early Church: An
Historical Introduction to Patristic Exegesis, trans. John A Hughes Chapter 3
and ed. Anders Bergquist and Markus Bockmuehl (Edinburgh: T&T
Clark, 1994), 67. 4 Laurie Ann Pinkert, Antiochene Methods of
Interpretation (Boiling Springs, North Carolina: Gardner-Webb
University, 2012) 4.
5 For a detailed study of Patristic hermeneutics, See the writings of H. de
Lubac, especially Exégèse médiévale: Les quatre sens de F Ecriture
Augustinian and
(Paris, 1959-64); The Sources of Revelation (New York, 1968). J. Daniélou,
From Shadows to Reality (New York, 1960); W. J. Burghardt, “On Early
Thomistic Medievalism
Christian Exegesis,” Theological Studies 11 (1950) 78-116; Tad W. The Third Stage of Biblical Hermeneutics
Guzie, Word and Worship in the Preaching of Leo the Great (Cambridge
University, 1970).
6 Tad W. Guzie, “Patristic Hermeneutics and the Meaning of Tradition,”
Theological Studies 25 (1994) 647.
7 Pinkert, Antiochene Methods , 4.

A
8 Manlino Simonetti, Biblical Interpretation in the Early Church: An fter the fall of Rome in 410 AD, the church
Historical Introduction to Patristic Exegesis , trans. John A Hughes entered into a long, lackluster era of intellectual
and ed. Anders Bergquist and Markus Bockmuehl. (Edinburgh: T&T
Clark, 1994), 67. demise. The collapse of Rome and the ensuing
chaos created a widespread ignorance of the Bible in
9 Guzie, “Patristic Hermeneutics,” 648.
the West. This dire situation would last until the 11th
10 Guzie, “Patristic Hermeneutics,” 651.
century, when greater stability began to take root in
11 Simonetti, Biblical Interpretation, 56. western Europe. The Augustinian Hermeneutical Sign
12 Frances Young, The Westminster Dictionary of Christian Theology, Theory and Thomistic Hermeneutics are the major
1983, p. 228
events of this period. Spiritual reformers such as the
13 Theodore of Mopsuestia, Commentary of the Epistles of St Paul. Latin Waldensians arose in the 12th century A.D.; Saint
Version with Greek Fragments, vol. 1, edited by H.B. Swete, 11880, 21969,
95-103. Francis in the 13th; Johannes Eckhart, Johannes Tauler
14 Meyedorff, Christ in the Eastern Christian Thought, p. 5.
and Heinrich Suso in the 14th, and John Wycliffe and
John Huss in the 14th-15th centuries.
15 It is observed by Bray, Biblical Interpretation, 86.
16 Tarazi, “Antichian School,” 8. Augustinian Hermeneutics
17 Tarazi, “Antichian School,” 9. Augustine is the first orthodox Christian in the West
18 See Bradley Nassif, “The ‘Spiritual Exegesis’ of Scripture: The School of to advance a comprehensive and original hermeneutic.
Antioch Revisited,” Anglican Theological Review 75 (2013) 437-470. The Jewish exegete Philo and Origen are his
predecessors in the East, Ambrose and Ticonius in the
36 37
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
West. “Ambrose is orthodox, but not original; Ticonius is original, humble Christian who truly desires to know God, rather than
but not orthodox. Augustine’s contemporary Jerome spent the better just wanting to know the Bible for its own sake. An interpreter
part of his life on translation and exegesis of Scripture.”1 St. Augustine must be a humble, Christ-like character, desiring to know God
embodies the quintessential theologian who enacted his ideas in a and his truth.
devotional life. Augustine explains that teaching someone the rules 3. A good working familiarity with the whole Bible is necessary
of interpretation is like teaching them the alphabet: once they know for effective interpretation. As the entire Bible points to a
these basics, they can read for themselves without needing someone single overarching truth, specifically, the call to love God and
else to read to them.2 Whereas On Christian Doctrine explicates other people with one’s whole heart, he believes that even
the nuances of Scriptural interpretation, the Confessions illustrates difficult passages of scripture can be understood with reference
these tenets in Augustine’s own life, while The City of God extends to this one great truth. For that reason, anyone who tries to
these ideas onto the entirety of human history. interpret scripture should have a good general knowledge of
In his work On Christian Doctrine (De Doctrina Christiana), the Bible and how its parts fit together. Augustine says
written in 397, Augustine pointed out that the way to determine if a repeatedly that many difficult or obscure passages can be made
passage is allegorical or not is to consult "the rule of faith," that is the sense of in the light of the clearer ones.
teaching of the church as well as Scripture itself. Augustine developed 4. An awareness of and respect for what the Church has believed
another theory in the same book “the principle of the analogy of through the centuries is absolutely necessary for interpretation.
faith," by which he meant that no interpretation is acceptable if it is Augustine speaks of this in terms of the ‘rule of faith’, which
contrary to the general tenor of the rest of Scripture. in his time was a concept referring to the church’s collection
Augustine explains the following principle of Biblical of authoritative interpretations of scripture written by earlier
interpretation:3 Church Fathers, as well as the doctrinal creeds hammered
1. A realistic appreciation for the way God blends spiritual and out by church councils.5
human elements in communicating his truth is mandatory for 5. Situating ourselves firmly in the community of faith, past and
every interpreter. Some people would argue that there is no present, helps guard ourselves against strange new
need for guidelines for interpreting the Bible because they have interpretations of scripture which might distinctively lead us
a direct, Spirit-given understanding of scripture. He writes: A out of that community and away from its Savior. Too often
third class of critic consists of those who either interpret the today’s preachers emphasize novelty or a ‘fresh word from
divine scriptures quite correctly or think they do. Because the Spirit’ rather than recognizing that Jesus Christ who is
they see, or at least believe, that they have gained their ability “the same yesterday, today and tomorrow” (1-Icb. 13:8)
to expound the holy books without recourse to any rules of speaks with a consistent voice.
the kind that I have now undertaken to give, they will clamour Augustine held to a fourfold interpretation of Scripture: historical,
that these rules are not needed by anybody, and that all aetiological, analogical, and allegorical. And yet he stressed only
worthwhile illumination of the difficulties of these texts can two meanings: the "signum" (the sign) and the "res" (the thing).
come by a special gift of God.4
Augustinian Sign Theory
2. Augustine repeatedly says that the person who wants to
understand what a passage of scripture really means must Augustine is considered to be the pioneer of linguistic theory
have certain spiritual qualifications. The interpreter must be a because of his ideas about how ‘signs’ work in human

38 39
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
communication. He posited an original theory of language that catachresis, and irony. One’s adroitness with these literary devices
resonated throughout intellectual discourse thereafter. According to promotes his understanding of otherwise opaque Scriptural language.
Augustinian sign theory, signs are simply “things used to signify Augustine suggests several means to understand the unknown
something”. 6 These signs impact recipients’ senses and impart signs and to discern the ambiguous signs:
relevant mental associations or concepts. For example, smoke
functions as a sign: when perceived by the nose and eyes, it signifies 1. A thorough proficiency in original language is an absolute
the fire from which it issues. Be aware of how human language works, necessity. Because the translations of the Bible are always
communicating through ‘signs’ (words) Augustine calls attention to misleading.
the fact that the challenges we face in understanding a passage of 2. Another way to come to understand unknown signs, according
scripture arc often rooted in the difficulty of using human language to Augustine, is to make use of secular learning, especially
to communicate divine truths. Language is made up of ‘signs’ history and science. Augustine is probably responsible for
(words), Augustine explains. Those signs are not ‘natural’, they arc originating the famous stance of exploiting secular resources
‘given’-that is, words arc arbitrary symbols which human beings for spiritual ends. In the Augustinian understanding, while a
speaking the same language agree to use to indicate certain things. knowledge of secular history and science can be an important
These signs, as explicit signifiers of the issuer’s mental state, help in understanding the ‘signs’ in scripture, the student should
elucidate for the recipient the other’s thoughts and feelings. These never confuse this knowledge with a knowledge of the ‘thing’
principles also apply to spoken and written language. Augustine calls the signs point to-that is, God himself.7
vocalized words “a multitude of innumerable signs by which men 3. Check passages which are difficult to understand against clear
express their thoughts.” With reference to biblical interpretation overall biblical truth. One should proceed to explore and
Augustine writes, “There are two reasons why written texts fail to analyse the obscure passages, by taking examples from the
be understood. He distinguishes two signs, namely, unknown signs more obvious parts.
and ambiguous signs. “‘Unknown’ signs can often become known
simply by learning more, especially the original languages in which 4. Augustine gives the very practical advice that if more than
the Bible is written. Ambiguous signs might be understood as one interpretation of a passage seems possible-and if the
something at face value, but they may have more than one meaning possible interpretations don’t contradict the ‘rule of faith’-the
or it may be difficult to tell whether they should be taken literally or primary way to decide between them is to look at the context
figuratively. in which the verse is found.
The ephemerality of spoken language incites man’s efforts to 5. Augustine advocates that one shall not take literal things
devise and record visual signs for these words. This linkage of sign figuratively or figurative things literally. The aspect of biblical
theory to spoken and written language is one of Augustine’s chief interpretation which Augustine develops is the issue of
innovations in his famous work “On Christian Doctrine. The Bible is distinguishing between literal and metaphorical, or figurative,
rife with these figurative signs. Augustine scites the illustrative example language in scripture. He writes “A person who follows the
of the ox: this sign signifies “evangelist” when situated within a letter understands metaphorical words as literal, and does not
scriptural framework that recalls St. Paul’s statement, “Thou shalt relate what the literal word signifies to any other meaning. On
not muzzle the ox that treads out of the corn (Dt 25:4). These hearing the word ‘sabbath’, for example, he interprets it simply
figurative signs are enacted through tropes, which include metaphor, as one of the seven days which repeat themselves in a
40 41
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
continuous cycle; and on hearing the word ‘sacrifice’ his Vignaux notes, Aquinas placed Christianity “in the midst of
thoughts do not pass beyond the rituals performed with Aristotelian natural philosophy, in the very center of the science of
sacrificial beasts or fruits of the earth. It is, then, a miserable nature.”11 The period of the last third of the twelfth and the beginning
kind of spiritual slavery to interpret signs as things, and to be of the thirteenth century is characterized by the breakthrough of a
incapable of raising the mind’s eye above the physical creation desire for biblical knowledge. This thirst for scriptural knowledge
so as to absorb the eternal light.”8 soon developed as an academic tendency in its own right, which is
6. Augustine argues for the multiple meanings of a single passage. known later as biblical evangelism. Aquinas held that the literal
In fact, he suggests that this multiplicity of meanings may have meaning is basic, but that other senses are built on it. Since the Bible
been planned and implemented by the Holy Spirit as a has a divine author as well as human authors, he argued, it has a
generous and bountiful gift from God for our benefit.9 This spiritual sense. "The literal sense is that which the author intends, but
Augustinian thought paved the way for the concept of sensus God being the Author, we may expect to find in the Scripture a
plenior. If more than one meaning is assumed to be latent in wealth of meaning." "The things signified by the words (the literal
text, one must make sure that every proposed meaning is sense) may also signify other things (the spiritual sense)."
consistent with the broad teaching of the Bible as it is expressed Another important factor is the introduction of Aristotelianism
in other, clearer passages. into the theology of the Church through the medium of Arabian and
Jewish scholars. As John Franklin Johnson observes, the impact of
7. Eventually, Augustine suggested “the hermeneutical rule of this Aristotelian thought on medieval hermeneutics was basically felt
love,” as the ‘fulfillment and end’ of biblical revelation is the in various connections.
love of God and the love of neighbor. In Augustinian terms,
“‘Correct’ interpretation of Scripture means living a life of 1. Against the Platonic philosophical orientation that distinguishes
love and service to God, to the church as the people of God, between the world of ordered forms above and the world of
and to the world. sense-experience below, it argued for the unity of sense and
thought. According to the Aristotelian view, the universal ideas
Just as man attempts to channel his thoughts into representative exist only as expressed in the individual objects of the sensible
oral or written expressions, so God’s Word becomes flesh through world, and we know them apart from, but only through, sense-
the Son. “Significantly, both cases require acts of accommodation. experience. In terms of hermeneutics, one cannot understand
As Augustine says in The Trinity: “For just as our word in some the Bible by naively distinguishing letter from spirit and making
way becomes a bodily sound…[so that] it may be manifested to the a separate study of each. 12
senses of men, so the Word of God was made flesh by assuming
that in which He might also be manifested to the senses of men.”10 2. The Aristotelian notion of science as that which establishes
In this passage, both man and God translate their original “words” rational connections and gathers them around a center had an
into forms that “may be manifested to the senses of man”; in so impact on hermeneutics. On the one hand, it detached the
doing, they accommodate man’s limited sensory perception interpretation of the Bible from a realm of mystical meanings
mechanisms. that could not be rationally related to the text and thus brought
theology and exegesis into closer relation to one another. On
Thomistic Theory of Meaning the other hand, it introduced a powerful element of inferential
His massive Summa Theologiae stands as a monumental reasoning into interpretation. Consequently, there arose a
synthesis of Aristotelian philosophy and Christian theology. As Paul natural theology side by side with revealed theology.13
42 43
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
3. The third aspect of the Thomistic metaphysics of act is that develops his own notion of participation and his entire metaphysics.
the personal individuality of the spiritual principle is defended Moreover, St. Thomas argued that whenever it is known from
against the principal thesis. The refutation of this thesis involves, some other source that there are in existence substances which are
as it were, two distinct moments: (i) The phenomenological absolutely spiritual, the genus and difference of their definition do
moment, which is self-consciousness understood as the not indicate any more two opposite ontological principles but rather
individual awareness that everyone has of being himself. (ii) the same formal reality considered first in its indeterminateness and
The metaphysical moment, inasmuch as the consciousness then in the distinctive character of the individual spirits. At first
of understanding (second act) - which is an absolute “first” in philosophy was merely the tool of theology. But by the thirteenth
the spiritual life - can be explained only by admitting that every century philosophy became the rival of faith, not just its slave. Thomas
single man is endowed with an individual spiritual soul (first Aquinas (1224-1274) attempted to harmonize the two worldviews
act). of Christianity and Aristotle. He developed a Christian theology based
4. The fourth aspect of Thomistic metaphysics is the affirmation on the philosophy of Aristotle.
of real distinction in all creatures between essence and the act Regarding Biblical interpretation, Aquinas held, one has to
of being (esse), which is the end result of the new concept of determine the intention of the author and discern the significant form
act. This involves two distinct points: (i) Pure perfection of what he has to say through turning one’s attention to the things
(perfectio separata) can only be one, and esse is the first signified and through noting the use of his words by examining their
perfection and the act of all acts; hence subsisting esse is only relation to the whole of his discourse.” Thomas argues that the natural
one and this is God, whose essence is to be. (ii) All creatures light of our intellect is of finite strength and hence can but reach to
are beings by participation, inasmuch as their essence what is limited. Therefore man needs supernatural light, that he may
participates in the esse which is the ultimate act of all reality; penetrate farther in order to learn what he cannot learn through his
hence the essence of creatures is related to esse as potency natural light, and that supernatural light given to man is called the gift
is to act. It is with this notion of participation that Thomas can of understanding (donum intellectus). The following are the major
overcome Augustinianism. hermeneutical principles developed by Thomas Aquinas:
5. Finally, the notion of participation provides the formula for 1. The primary necessity is to study the text. The interpreter of
the analogy between creatures and their Creator: “Creatures the Word of God has to see the parts in relation to the whole
are said to resemble God, not by sharing a form of the same and the whole in relation to the parts that comprise it.
specific or generic type, but only analogically, inasmuch as 2. From start to finish Thomas Aquinas is a rational, scientific
God is being by his very essence. thinker. It is not surprising therefore that he should act in the
St. Thomas’ attempt to overcome the opposition between Plato same way with regard to Sacred Scripture. No science can
and Aristotle by bringing their fundamental principles and conclusions prove its first principles, but it is in the light of them that it
into agreement is reflected throughout his writings. This he did by knows what is less knowable. Thomas claims, the Bible
elaborating his own notion of participation. This notion, in contrast occupies the place of first principles, and it is in the light of the
with the Neoplatonic concordism, presents an entirely new concept truths they reveal that the whole process of theological activity
and principle: it is the concept of esse as actus essendi, not to be is undertaken?
confused with the existentia of Augustinianism and of rationalism. 3. Unlike the natural science that depends on human reason, the
It is from the concept of esse as ground-laying first act that Thomas theological science depends on divine revelation. Theological
44 45
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
science receives its principles immediately from God through
the divine revelation given to the prophets and apostles.
4. Aquinas virtually made the authority of the Church dominant
over the prima veritas. Certainly, too, after Aquinas there
emerged medieval theologians for whom the scholastic system
was the principal matter and the interpretation of the Bible a
Chapter 4
secondary matter.
By the end of the medieval period the “seeing” culture and the
“hearing” culture both had become stronger and began to form
themselves into competing worldviews. Faith increasingly began to Bibliolatry or
rely on revelation to justify itself while the philosophers claimed the
empirical world for themselves
Prima Scriptura?
Fourth Stage: The Tension of Reformation

Endnotes
1 For details see Frederick Van Fleteren, ‘Principles of Augustine’s
Hermeneutic: An Overview,’ in Frederick Van Fleteren and Joseph C.
Schnaubelt (eds.), Augustine: Biblical Exegete (New York: Peter Lang,

W
hen the Reformation arose in 1520, the
2001) 1.
Reformers firmly rejectedAquinas’mingling
2 Augustine, On Christian Doctrine, preface 9.18. All quotations from On
Christian Doctrine are taken from Saint Augustine, On Christian of faith and philosophy. Instead, the
Teaching, trans. R.P.H. Green (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997). Reformers based their theology solely on the biblical
3 Stephanie L. Black, “Augustine’s Hermeneutics: Back to the Future for revelation. In this way the Reformation represents a
‘Spiritual’ Bible Interpretation?” African Journal of Evangelical triumph of the church’s “hearing” culture over its
Theology 27/1 (2008) 1-34, 4. “seeing” culture. The approach of the reformation
4 Augustine, On Christian Doctrine , preface 2.4. period can be understood in the following four
5 Augustine, On Christian Doctrine, preface 3.2. classifications:1
6 Denna Iammarino-Falhamer, “Hermeneutics, Poetry, and Spenser:
Augustinian Exegesis and the Renaissance Epic” (2011). 1. Dual-source theory of Catholics advocated for
7 Augustine, On Christian Doctrine, 2.10. the equal importance of the written Scripture and
8 Augustine, On Christian Doctrine, 3.10. the living tradition of the Church. Catholics
9 Augustine, On Christian Doctrine, 3.27. believed that Tradition, represented by the
10 For details see Karlfried Froehlich, “‘Take Up and Read”: Basics of magisterial authority of the Roman Catholic
Augustine’s Biblical Interpretation,’ Interpretation 58/ I (2004) 13. Church, is infallible and equal to Scripture as a
11 Paul Vignaux, Philosophy in the Middle Ages(NewYork: Harpper, 1959), 119. basis for doctrine; the Church itself is the final
12 John Franklin Johnson, “Hermeneutics in Thomas Aquinas: An authority in all matters of faith and practice since
Appraisal and Appreciation,” Concordia Theological Quarterly 45/3
(1981) 223-232, 225. it must define and interpret Scripture and
13 Johnson, “Hermeneutics in Thomas Aquinas,” 225. Tradition. This approach is also known as prima
46 47
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
scriptura theory because among the Scripture and Tradition, past, but it is a position of arrogance, elevating individual
Scripture is the primary and normative source for authority. reason to the position of final authority. It also disregards the
However, by itself it is insufficient for all matters of faith and fact that it is impossible to interpret in a vacuum
practice. Tradition also contains essential elements needed The dominance of the hearing culture led the reformists to the
for the productive Christian life. arguments of sola Scriptura. The reformist approach to the Bible is
2. Sola Scriptura argument of the Protestants held the belief that often accused to be a form of bibliolatry. The term bibliolatry comes
Scripture is the final and only infallible authority for the from combining the Greek words for Bible and worship; worship
Christian in all matters of faith and practice. While there are of the Bible. It is part of the attack on believers who hold to “sola
other authorities, they are always fallible and the must always scriptura” and/or a literal interpretation of the Bible. It is neither
be tested by and submit to the Scriptures. Sola Scriptura idolatry nor expanding Trinity into a ‘Quadranty.’ It emphasizes the
approach does not reject the tradition as such. According to Bible at the cost of tradition, nature and reason. The Bible is not to
the sola Scriptura view tradition is not infallible. It is very be worshipped, but the God of the Bible is to be worshipped. The
important to realize that advocates of sola Scriptura would Bible is not God, nor does the Bible contain all of God’s knowledge.
believe that there were two sources of authority for the first True reason is completely compatible with Scripture. There is no
300–400 years of the Church. Like the previous view, tradition contradiction between Bible and God-given reason and God-
would be understood as a summary of what was written in directed experience (1 Pt 3:15).
Scripture that had always been accepted by the universal Martin Luther was deadly against allegorical approach to the
Church. Unlike the previous view, this summary is not infallible Bible. As Luther himself wrote, "Allegories are empty speculations
3. Regula Fidei which literally means “rule of faith,” is an approach and as it were the scum of Holy Scripture." "Origen's allegories are
advocated by Eastern Orthodox and some Protestants and it not worth so much dirt." "To allegorize is to juggle with Scripture."
held the view that tradition is an infallible “summary” of Scripture "Allegorizing may degenerate into a mere monkeygame."2 Rejecting
passed on through apostolic succession. Ultimately, there is the allegorical, Luther stressed the literal ("sensus literalis"). His
only one source of revelation, but two sources of authority. In emphasis on the literal led to his stress on the original languages.
other words, Tradition is Scripture. "We shall not long preserve the Gospel without the languages. The
4. Sola Scriptura or Nuda Scriptura is the belief held by radical languages are the sheath in which this sword of the Spirit is
reformists and according to them, Scripture is the sole basis contained."3 . And yet the Bible interpreter, Luther said, must be
and authority in the life of the Christian. Tradition is useless more than a philologist. He must be illumined by the Holy Spirit.
and misleading, and creeds and confessions are the result of Furthermore, the grammatical-historical approach is not an end in
man-made traditions. It represents the unfortunate position of itself; it is to lead us to Christ.
many evangelical or fundamental Protestants who In his "Analogia Scripturae" ("analogy of faith") he, like Augustine,
misunderstand sola Scriptura believing that it means that the said that obscure passages are to be understood in light of the clear
ideal place for believers to find authority and interpret Scripture passages. "Scripture is its own interpreter," and “Every devout
is to do so in a historical vacuum, disregarding any tradition Christian can understand the Bible. "There is not on earth a book
that might influence and bind their thinking. Not only does this more lucidly written than the Holy Scripture."4 By this emphasis he
undermine the Holy Spirit’s role in the lives of believers of the was opposing the dependence of the common people on the Roman
Catholic Church.
48 49
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
John Calvin (1509-1564) is known as "one of the greatest “Sola scriptura” is unhistorical unbiblical unworkable
interpreters of the Bible" from the protestant wing. Like Luther, v Sola Scriptura is Unbiblical: Neither OT nor NT contains
Calvin rejected allegorical interpretations (he said that Origen and any hint of “sola scriptura:” Christ instituted a teaching Church
many others were guilty of "torturing the Scripture, in every possible (Mat 28:19-20), endowed with his own authority (Luke 10:16;
sense, from the true sense"), and stressed the Christological nature Matt. 16:18, 18:18).The notion of “Scripture alone” is not
of Scripture, the grammatical-historical method, exegesis rather than found in the teachings of any of the apostles
eisegesis, the illuminating ministry of the Holy Spirit, and a balanced v Sola Scriptura is Unhistorical: Neither the Church Fathers
approach to typology.4 nor the councils speaks about “sola scriptura.” Often cited
Ulrich Zwingli (1484-1531) in his famous "Sixty-Seven Theses" Athanasius, John Chrysostom, Cyril of Jerusalem, Augustine,
in 1523 wrote that "all who say that the Gospel is nothing without and Basil of Caesarea are isolated from the rest of what the
the approval of the Church err and cast reproach upon God." He Father in question wrote about church authority.
emphasized the importance of interpreting Bible passages in light of v Material and Formal sufficiency: The material sufficiency of
their contexts. Pulling a passage from its context "is like breaking off Scripture taught by the Fathers and the Reformers’ formal
a flower from its roots." In discussing the role of the Spirit's illuminating sufficiency are different. The Catholic Church holds that in
ministry he states that "certainty comes from the power and clarity order for the meaning of Sacred Scripture to be properly
of the creative activity of God and the Holy Spirit."6 understood, the Church must have recourse to its living
Council of Trent Tradition - i.e., the infallible interpretation of the apostolic
“depositum fidei” (c.f., “Dei verbum”, no. 10). And this
The Roman Catholic Church reacted to the Protestant Reformation interpretation is guaranteed by an infallible Magisterium.
by its own inner reforms known as the Counter Reformation, which
culminated in the affirmations of the Council of Trent. This Council v It is impossible to have any canon without the Church
affirmed that the Bible is not the supreme authority, but that truth is - no “inspired table of contents” in Scripture that tells us
"in written books and in unwritten traditions." Those traditions include about the canonicity
the church fathers of the past and the church leaders of the present. - Notion of canon comes from outside Scripture.
The Council also affirmed that accurate interpretation was possible - Our knowledge of canon must be infallible, binding and
only by the Church, the giver and protector of the Bible, not by this authority must be part of divine revelation.
individuals. "No one - relying on his own skill shall - in matters of v 2 Timothy 3:16-17: 2 Timothy 3:16-17 does not teach the
faith and words pertaining to the edification of Christian doctrine - sufficiency of the scripture. The text says that Scripture is
wresting the sacred Scriptures to his own senses, presume to interpret “ophelimos”, (“useful” or “profitable”) Paul’s use of the Greek
it contrary to that sense which the holy Mother Church ... hath held terms “artios” (“suitable” or “correct”) and “exartismenos”
and doth hold; or even contrary to the unanimous consent of the (“having been furnished”) does not imply the sufficiency of
Fathers."7 Scripture, on purely lexical grounds. For instance, in 2
Why Is Sola Scriptura Rejected? Timothy2:19-21, Paul exhorts Timothy to cleanse himself from
all that is not holy and virtuous, saying that doing so will make
Word of God must be given priority. However, Final authority him “ready for every good work” (v.21). The exact same
for Christians is not Scripture, but Christ. The basic question is who
represents now Christ, the Judge of Scripture.
50 51
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
Greek phrase is used here as in 2 Timothy 3:16: “pan ergon
agathon” (“for every good work”).
v Sola Scriptura is unworkable: Can you show where in history
“sola scriptura” has worked? Answer is nowhere. Without
recourse to Sacred Tradition “sola scriptura” fails miserably. Chapter 5
The best evidence of is the Protestantism divided over 22,000
fragments. Each claim to go by the “Bible alone,” yet no two
of them agree on what exactly the Bible teaches.
v Martin Luther: In a letter to Urlich Zwingli, he complained
bitterly about the doctrinal anarchy that was even then rampant From the
among Protestants: “If the world lasts, it will be necessary, on
account of the differing interpretations of Scripture which now Enlightenment to the Modern Era
exist, that to preserve the unity of faith, we should receive the Fifth Stage of Biblical Hermeneutics
[Catholic] councils and decrees and fly to them for refuge.

lthough the reformers moved back to safer

A ground with the literal-historical approach to

interpreting the Scriptures, over the years, this
resulted in a dogmatic approach to the Bible. A
dogmatic approach represents a moving away from a
living, active theology to a ‘rule of faith’ which everyone
should believe in order to be in the faith. As time passed,
instead of vibrant faith filling the hearts, confessional
Endnotes orthodoxy emerged in the church. As enlightenment
1 Michael Patton, In Defense of Sola Scriptura (New York: Mind thinking hit the world, many rejected this dogmatic rule
Ministry, 2009) 15. of faith. A new found Pietism emerged in Philipp Jakob
2. These citations are from Farrar, History of Interpretation, p. Spener (1635-1705) and August Herman Franke
328. (1663-1727). This pietism focused on a real
3. Complete Works of Martin Luther, 4:114-15.
4. Martin Luther, Exposition of the 37th Psalm, 22. experiential reality of God and of biblical morality. This
5. Lewis, Biblical Hermeneutics, 38-39. has led people to read the Bible more devotionally as
6. Lewis, Biblical Hermeneutics, 41. they focus upon experiencing God, moral obligation
7. This citation is from Lewis, Biblical Hermeneutics, 41. and practical application of the Scriptures. The
weakness of this period has been that very little new
. thought of true biblical interpretive methods.
52 53
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
Rationalism and Deism: Job 38:1-7 and 2 Peter 1:16-21. The first passage begins with
After the Reformation, the mood of Europe has turned slowly submission to the divine record of creation, attested to by God
toward rationalism. In fact, rationalism came with the Enlightenment Himself:
and followed in the wake of the Reformation. Rationalists such as Then the Lord answered Job out of the whirlwind, and said:
Benedict Spinoza (1632-1677) and John Locke (1632-1704) “Who is this who darkens counsel by words without knowledge?
argued for a moral and rational religion. Now prepare yourself like a man; I will question you, and you shall
Once men were able to think for themselves, and the sciences answer Me. Where were you when I laid the foundations of the
became dominant, the authority of the Church and Scripture was earth? Tell Me, if you have understanding. Who determined its
challenged.1 Rationalists rely on their own reasoning as the ultimate measurements? Surely you know! Or who stretched the line upon
authority. Liberal Protestant theologians take a rationalistic view of it? To what were its foundations fastened? Or who laid its
Scripture. The Bible may contain the Word of God, along with many cornerstone, when the morning stars sang together, and all the sons
errors, they say. Ideas of revelation or inspiration are often rejected. of God shouted for joy?” (Job 38:1-7)
Further, the reality of miracles, Satan, demons, creation by the word It requires belief in the Divine record of the person and work of
of God, the Parousia (or second coming), and heaven and hell are Jesus Christ, attested to by human eyewitnesses whose testimony is
similarly repudiated. Human reason and ‘the spirit of Christ’, it is recorded in Scripture:
maintained, are needed to decide which parts of Scripture are true For we did not follow cunningly devised fables when we made
and which parts are false.14 So-called Higher Criticism has received known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but
a bad name due to the fact that many nineteenth and twentieth century were eyewitnesses of His majesty. For He received from God the
biblical scholars were rationalists, whose views coloured critical Father honor and glory when such a voice came to Him from the
studies. We need to update our awareness here. We live in a post- Excellent Glory: “This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well
modern age where the authority of science and technology has been pleased.” And we heard this voice which came from heaven when
questioned and re-evaluated. All knowledge is now taken to be we were with Him on the holy mountain. And so we have the
meaningful. The rise of new age religions are evidence to the fact prophetic word confirmed, which you do well to heed as a light that
that spiritual experience is now taken seriously. shines in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises
Protest against rationalism shall not prompt one to opt for in your hearts; knowing this first, that no prophecy of Scripture is of
irrationalism which actually happened in pietism, which is now any private interpretation, for prophecy never came by the will of
followed in evangelical preaching that is couched in this kind of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy
language: “Don’t think too much about Christianity and the Bible, Spirit (2 Peter 1:16-21).
just ‘believe’ and feel good about it.” This is not Christian faith rooted That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which
in Divine reason but, existentialist pragmatism couched in Christian we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our
jargon. Genuine Christian faith is not a blind, irrational “faith” in the hands have handled, concerning the Word of life - the life was
nebulous, the uncertain, the changeable. It is not the practical rejection manifested, and we have seen, and bear witness, and declare to
of the authority of Christ and His Word. Genuine Christian faith is you that eternal life which was with the Father and was manifested
submission to the authority of God who is consummately rational. to us - that which we have seen and heard we declare to you, that
Two biblical passages point to the importance of rational approach: you also may have fellowship with us; and truly our fellowship is
54 55
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
with the Father and with His Son Jesus Christ. And these things we Soren Kierkegaard’s rejection of reason led to even worse
write to you that your joy may be full (1 John 1:1-4). thinking among many Christians. Kierkegaard correctly understood
that humanistic rationalism leads to the loss of all meaning. But he
The danger of humanistic rationalism is that it denies the reality of
did not fully accept the supernatural nature of the Bible as the Divine
God’s revelation, and the pragmatism it produces denies the power
revelation of understandable, objective, propositional truth. Even
of the Word and the church. The early Corinthian church, though it
so, since he had a nominally Lutheran upbringing, Kierkegaard
began well, soon fell prey to such deception (1 Corinthians 1:18-
wanted to have the comfort of “faith” as a source of some sense of
2:5). Paul also warned the Thessalonians, “Quench not the Spirit”
meaning in an otherwise meaningless world. “Faith” for Kierkegaard
(1 Thessalonians 5:19). How does the church do that? Paul
then became irrational - a “leap into the dark” as he called it. By
immediately goes on to say, “Do not despise prophesyings” - literally,
elevating the subjectivity of this counterfeit of Christian “faith,”
do not diminish or debase Divine revelation in your thinking (5:20).
Kierkegaard effectively rejected the objectivity of propositional truth
And next, “Prove all things; hold fast that which is good” in light of
in Scripture - one of the great truths reclaimed by the Protestant
God’s infallible and uniquely authoritative Word (5:21). And finally,
Reformers. Thus, Kierkegaard actually rejected the authority of
“Abstain from every form of evil” (5:22).
Scripture, and helped set the stage for the postmodernist
In the mood of the time it was easy for the Deists to conclude deconstruction of Scripture by succeeding generations.
that supernaturalism was not rational at all. They rejected the Kierkegaard was, ironically, the forerunner of existentialists such
Reformers and, in turn, erected a rival religion based entirely on as Friedrich Nietzsche, who came full circle into a worse form of
natural reason alone. And so, a Deist like Anthony Collins (1676- humanistic rationalism coupled with evolutionary philosophy.
1729) taught that the prophecies could not possibly be literal Nietzsche believed that human reason is rationalization, merely the
prophecies, and that miracles were absurd. The “seeing” culture expression of what each man wants, and therefore a contest of weak
was now stronger than the “hearing” culture. This led to the period versus strong wills. What man calls truth, according to Nietzsche, is
of radical biblical criticism. simply a matter of what the strongest man or group of men wills.
Existential and the Neo-Orthodox View Whatever man can make work in order to achieve his purposes -
that is truth. This understanding of truth affected adversely the church.
While rationalism is outmoded, subjectivism is in fashion.
The Spirit-quenching pragmatism of the nominally Evangelical church
Existentialism, which majors on human experience has colored
of the 21st century is also the product of the influences of humanistic
approaches to the Bible in the twentieth century. Existentaalism has
rationalism and its existentialist philosophy. The humanistic rationalism
led to the thought that Bible to be God’s Word only in the sense that
leads to the thought that what is most important is not what the
it contains God’s Word. Furthermore, it only becomes so by personal
Scripture says, but what “works” - what attracts the most people,
faith. The Bible is not, does not contain, objective truth. Existentialism
what builds the biggest “ministry”, what produces the most “vibrant”
places an emphasis on the individual, and sees an irrational ‘leap of
worship, what most “affirms” people and makes them feel good.
faith’ necessary in order to experience a word from God. Søren Viewed in terms of Nietzsche’s test of wills, the strong-willed
Kierkegaard (1813-1855) is often called the father of Christian pragmatists in the church have largely triumphed over weak-willed
existentialism. He reacted against the formality of the Dutch Reformed Christians who have remained silent or lodged only ineffectual
Church and the way that people seemed to lose their personal identity protests. By force of will, the pragmatists have established a new
as they entered the Church. Nietzschian “truth” - the philosophy of the Purpose-Driven Church.

56 57
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
Karl Barth (1886-1968), Emil Brunner and John Baillie represent There are two things at stake in this statement, namely, the
neo-orthodoxy. This school holds that God has revealed himself in kingdom of God and eschatology. While the former is a
acts rather than words. To Barth the Word of God is not a revelation category of space, the latter is one of time. The kingdom of
in itself, but an instrument of divine disclosure: it is personal but not God seems to be an emphasis on the transcendent realm that
propositional. For Barth the Word is Christ. The Bible witnesses to is in contrast and actually in conflict with the human world,
Christ. Christ, to Brunner, is the Word in Scripture. What matters is agenda and construct. In this sense, God and God’s will are
man’s encounter with God. So, evangelicals take the orthodox view always the Absolute Other that is beyond human reason and
that the Bible is God’s Word; liberals believe the Bible contains grasp.
God’s Word; while the neo-orthodox hold the belief that the Bible
may become God’s Word through experience. 2. Related to his eschatology, Bultmann situates freedom proper
as the bliss after death when Christians have an untroubled
In his neo-Orthodox approach Karl Barth affirmed that the Living relationship with God, which has been mythologically but
Word of God is able to speak through the text even if the written properly described as a worshipping community that sings
word was found to be flawed with human weakness. It allowed the hymns of praise and thanksgiving. Dialectically, this
Bible to be a means of grace once again. The neo-orthodox eschatological freedom has been achieved once and for all in
theologians felt they had returned to the Reformation. The Reformers, the Christ event, which is always present in the proclaimed
Luther and Calvin, both believed that a historical study of the text word, not as timeless truth, but as happening here and now.
helps the reader to avoid subjectivism. Barth, on the other hand, In this sense, the eschatological freedom justifies and demands
downplayed the historical reading of the text. He said that the Bible the existential freedom to take up responsibility here and now.
was not the Word of God; it merely contained the Word of God.
3. The essence of the scriptures is “kergyma, that is, a
Demythologization of Rudolf Bultmann proclamation addressed not to the theoretical reason, but to
Bultmann tried to separate faith from historicity. The existentialist the hearer as a self.”4 The perennial message of God’s word
approach of Bultmann argued that our existential experience of the is to challenge the hearer, shaped by whatever worldview, it
text is our “faith” (death of the author). Bultmann understands might be, to give up personal sinfulness and security, and
demythologization as a hermeneutical method to discover the become a new person in Christ.
meaning of the Scriptures. This method dwells within a dialectical
tension. Negatively, it is an abandonment of the biblical worldview 4. Demythologization is to affirm that God is acting in the world.
that has become a stumbling block for understanding God’s word However, this action does not happen among worldly actions
for us. “To de-mythologize is to deny that the message of Scripture or events; it rather happens within them. The recognition of
and of the Church is bound to an ancient world-view which is this reality can only appeal to the eyes of faith, not to the
obsolete.”2 Stephen Tong points out the following emphases of evidence of any causal relationship between events.
Bultmann’s demythologization approaches: 3 5. Taking demythologization as a hermeneutic method, Bultmann
1. The starting point and basic assertion of Bultmann’s project is aware that interpretation is always based on principles and
of demythologization is that “Today nobody doubts that Jesus’ conceptions as its presuppositions since God’s word has to
conception of the Kingdom of God is an eschatological be mediated through human language shaped by certain
one,” which is the heart of Jesus’ preaching and message. philosophical categories. But two things are at stake:

58 59
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
a. “An exegesis which, for example, makes the is a rigorously objective discipline using a number of
presupposition that its results must agree with some specialized and scientific methodologies.
dogmatic statement is not a real and fair exegesis.” 2. Source criticism is the search for the original sources which
b. Which are the adequate presuppositions? This question lie behind a given biblical text. It can be traced back to the
is related to that of the philosophy one should adopt. 17th-century French priest Richard Simon and Julius
Certainly, this adoption is not arbitrary, but should Wellhausen. An example of source criticism is the study of the
contribute to the understanding of the kergyma, which synoptic problem and four documentary hypothesis of
demands an existential response to God’s word in Pentateuch.
freedom from sin and freedom for love. In this sense, 3. Form criticism breaks the Bible down into sections (pericopes,
Bultmann sees the value of existential philosophy whose stories) which are analyzed and categorized by genres (prose
categories are not supposed to replace God’s word, or verse, letters, laws, court archives, war hymns, poems of
but can enhance the sensibility and exigency of the lament, etc.). The form critic then theorizes on the pericope’s
hearer towards it. Sitz im Leben (“setting in life”), the setting in which it was
6. Although Bultmann does not exempt one from using symbolic composed.
language or images, he denies the valid use of these symbols 4. Redaction criticism studies “the collection, arrangement, editing,
and images in a general sense. For example, images such as and modification of sources”, and is frequently used to
God as creator or God as acting do not refer to any event reconstruct the community and purposes of the authors of the
without myself being involved in this event. The analogical use text. It is based on the comparison of differences between
of the symbolic language must correlate with a personal or an manuscripts and their theological significance.
existential reference. Here, Bultmann denies the legitimacy of
affirming God as the creator of the world or Jesus as the saviour 5. Canonical criticism is “an examination of the final form of the
of the world, apart from my relationship with God as creature text as a totality, as well as the process leading to it”. Where
and with Jesus as my saviour. The strength of faith is to accept previous criticism asked questions about the origins, structure
that the former statements in general cannot be proved so and history of the text, canonical criticism addresses questions
that faith transcends the causal relationship that can be proved of meaning, both for the community (and communities—
in this world. subsequent communities are regarded as being as important
as the original community for which it was produced) which
Development of Various Biblical Criticisms used it, and in the context of the wider canon of which it forms
The various critical approaches, mainly the diachronic approaches a part.
have taken lead during this period. The synchronic approaches also 6. Rhetorical criticism of the Bible dates back to at least St.
began to take shape during this period. Augustine. Rhetorical criticism emphasized the unique and
1. Textual criticism (sometimes still referred to as “lower unrepeatable message of the writer or speaker as addressed
criticism”) refers to the examination of the text itself to identify to his audience, including especially the techniques and devices
its provenance or to trace its history. It takes as its basis the which went into crafting the biblical narrative as it was heard
fact that errors inevitably crept into texts as generations of (or read) by its audience. Rhetorical criticism asks how the
scribes reproduced each other’s manuscripts. Textual criticism text functions for its audience, including especially its original
60 61
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
audience: to teach, persuade, guide, exhort, reproach, or
inspire, and it concentrates especially on identifying and
elucidating unique features of the situation, including both the
techniques manifest in the text itself and the relevant features
of the cultural setting, through which this purpose is pursued.
Chapter 6
7. Narrative criticism is one of a number of modern forms of
criticism based on contemporary literary theory and practice.
In common with other literary approaches (and in contrast to
historical forms of criticism), narrative criticism treats the text Late Modern
as a unit, and focuses on narrative structure and composition,
plot development, themes and motifs, characters, and to Postmodern
characterisation. Narrative criticism is a complex field, but Sixth Stage of Biblical Hermeneutics
some central concerns include the reliability of the narrator,
the question of authorial intent, and the implications of multiple
interpretation - i.e., an awareness that a narrative is capable
of more than one interpretation, and thus of the implications
of each.
8. Psychological criticism is a perspective rather than a method.
It discusses the psychological dimensions of the authors of
the text, the material they wish to communicate to their
audience, and the reflections and meditations of the reader.
M any who are influenced by Bultmann will say
that they interpret the Bible metaphorically.
The problem with this approach is that the
reader defines the metaphor, thereby causing them to
read their own meaning into the text. This is nothing
9. Socio-scientific criticism (also known as socio-historical more than a subjective existentialism, which is not the
criticism and social-world criticism) is a contemporary form biblical doctrine of illumination, or hearing the Voice of
of multidisciplinary criticism drawing on the social sciences, God in Scripture.
especially anthropology and sociology. Subjective existentialism:
Subjective existentialism mainly advocated by
Sartre, dwells on the following principles.
Endnotes 1. We are condemned to be free so that we are
1 See R. McQuilkin, Understanding and Applying the Bible, pp. 27-35. responsible for shaping or authoring our own lives. We
2 Rudolf Bultmann, Jesus Christ and Mythology (New York: Charles
are free individuals and this freedom condemns us to
Scribner’s Sons, 1958), 13 make choices throughout our lives. That is true, actually.
So a man must create himself (his own essence) because
3 See Stephen Tong, “Bultmann’s Demythologization and Lonergan’s there is no predetermined human essence; it is not fixed
Method,” Theology Annual 24 (2003) 119-150.
in advance.
4 Bultmann,Jesus Christ and Mythology, 36.

62 63
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
2. Existentialism focuses on subjective experience rather than According to Sartre, one of the pioneers of subjective
objective truth. Rather than judge the rightness or wrongness of an existentialism, we are free individuals and this freedom condemns
experience by the objective Word of God, ‘Christian’ existentialism us to make choices throughout our lives. When we think about it, we
interprets and understands the Bible through and by the experience. ourselves are responsible for our own actions. What we do now, affects
Experience decides what is truth rather than truth authenticating or our future. So a man must create himself (his own essence) because
invalidating the experience. Thus the Bible is interpreted so as to fit there is no predetermined human essence; it is not fixed in advance.
personal or corporate experiences rather than personal and corporate There is real distinction between subjective and objective approaches:
experiences being approved or disapproved by the Bible. If something is objective it is true apart from my believing it is true
3. Existentialism focuses on the personal rather than on the and It exists as a fact. If something is subjective, it
universal. For any individual ‘truth’ is what is ‘true for me.’ Each is my interpretation, or my perception, of reality, which may or may
person’s perception of truth will be different from another’s. Thus I not actually be true. Whether it is actually, rationally, true, is not the
can read a Bible passage and get ‘truth’ and you can read the same point and does not really matter, because absolute truth doesn’t
passage and get a different ‘truth’. In this existential mentality there really exist; the important thing is that I believe it is true, therefore it
is no room for that passage to have one meaning for all people, is true for me.
because existentialism does not view truth in that way. As we were intently researching about Existentialism, reading about
4. Existentialism also focuses on the immediate and changing the subjective perspective of things really did perplex me. First things
rather than on the eternal and constant. The same passage that was first, what you see may not be what I see. I get that, yes. We, people
‘truth’ for me yesterday may not be ‘truth’ for me today, because it have different views because we contribute to our own meaning, our
does not do anything for me today. Or, it might speak a different interests and how we perceive things. I agree to this, actually because I
‘truth’ for me today. This variability of ‘truth’ has nothing to do with believe that we are unique individuals and not everyone of us are able to
the finiteness of our minds and our inability to take in all of God’s see eye to eye. That is why there is a word called open-mindedness;
truth in a given passage of the Bible at one time. It has to do with the wherein you relate to people and recognize their beliefs and what they
existential concept of ‘truth’: that ‘truth’ is what is ‘true for me’ at see even though it’s not what you believe and not what you see. However
my particular moment of existence. the thing that I struggled with is the Existentialist thinking that there is no
objectivity whatsoever in what a person believes in. So what is our
5. Thus in existentialism truth is relative rather than absolute. It basis? What do we adhere to? Nothing.
varies from individual to individual. It varies from moment to moment.
It is not fixed. It is not complete. It is not final. It has no boundaries. Subjective existentialist see that fate and destiny do not exist at all.
This means that every individual is free to believe whatever he/she There is no god who creates a future or makes a perfect plan for you.
wants to believe, and what they believe is ‘truth’ for them. There exists no hidden power that control what lies ahead. There are
also no god-given moral laws. To add to the dark and harsh world that
6. Existentialism seeks meaning and identity in the mystical we are trying to discern, Sartre also quoted Nietzsche, claiming that god
rather than the factual. Having discarded all objective sources and is dead. That means bible is a hoax, humans are alone in the universe
definitions of truth the existentialist has only one place left to look without a savior to guide them, no end goal in life and no salvation.
for truth: within. One’s own personal perceptions of reality - one’s
experiences, one’s impressions, one’s feelings, one’s ideas and Death of God Theology or Radical Theology
opinions - these define and decide what is believed or felt to be Death of God theology is also known as radical theology. This
truth. The existentialist becomes a ready prey for anyone and anything movement flourished in the mid 1960s. There is even disagreement
that can gain access to his/her mind and emotions. as to who its major representatives were. Although small, the
movement attracted attention because it was a spectacular symptom
64 65
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
of the bankruptcy of modern theology and because it was a essential identity between the human and the divine. God died in
journalistic phenomenon.1 Christ in this sense, and the process has continued time and again
Just what was death of God theology? The answers are as varied since then. Altizer claims the church tried to give God life again and
as those who proclaimed God’s demise. Since Nietzsche, theologians put him back in heaven by its doctrines of resurrection and ascension.
had occasionally used “God is dead” to express the fact that for an But now the traditional doctrines about God and Christ must be
increasing number of people in the modern age God seems to be repudiated because man has discovered after nineteen centuries that
unreal. But the idea of God’s death began to have special prominence God does not exist. Christians must even now will the death of God
in 1957 when Gabriel Vahanian published a book entitled God is by which the transcendent becomes immanent.
Dead. Vahanian did not offer a systematic expression of death of Altizer argues that Catholic theology has always recognized a
God theology. Instead, he analyzed those historical elements that general revelation (besides the special revelation of Scripture), that
contributed to the masses of people accepting atheism not so much it has never separated God the creator from God the redeemer, and
as a theory but as a way of life. Vahanian himself did not believe that that it has always grounded itself in philosophy and natural theology.
God was dead. But he urged that there be a form of Christianity that But if this is true, then it cannot now separate its doctrines of God,
would recognize the contemporary loss of God and exert its influence Christ, Church, and Faith from the historical development of human
through what was left. Other proponents of the death of God had consciousness and the fact of cosmic evolution. But evolution involves
the same assessment of God’s status in contemporary culture, but transformation and takes us beyond past forms much as the living
were to draw different conclusions. stream of present-day biological life has left behind the dead fossils
Paul Tillich, an avowed anti-supernaturalist, said that the only of its past. Therefore, Catholic theology can be open to the possibility
non-symbolic statement that could be made about God was that he of becoming one with death-of-God theology and leave the
was being itself. He is beyond essence and existence; therefore, to transcendent God himself behind as a dead fossil. However, this
argue that God exists is to deny him. It is more appropriate to say does not mean that theology becomes a mere naturalistic or
God does not exist. At best Tillich was a pantheist, but his thought humanistic anthropology, because even while undergoing kenotic
borders on atheism. Some of the basic terms of this theology is transformation God remains one with himself in the sense that the
borrowed from Dietrich Bonhoeffer. He wrote of the world and totality of that forward-moving energy and life can be said to be
man “coming of age,” of “religionless Christianity,” of the “world God and always remains the process of energy and life, and because,
without God,” and of getting rid of the “God of the gaps” and getting if I may add this point from The Gospel of Christian Atheism, death-
along just as well as before. It is not always certain what Bonhoeffer of-God theology demands a real wager of faith in the totally present
meant, but if nothing else, he provided a vocabulary that later radical and immanent, evolving Incarnate Word as the only Christ (risking
theologians could exploit. complete loss if Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and
forever).
Thomas J J Altizer believed that God had actually died. But Altizer
often spoke in exaggerated and dialectic language, occasionally with According to the death of God theologians, the idea of God and
heavy overtones of Oriental mysticism. Sometimes it is difficult to the word God itself are in need of radical reformulation. Perhaps
know exactly what Altizer meant when he spoke in dialectical totally new words are needed; perhaps a decent silence about God
opposites such as “God is dead, thank God!” But apparently the should be observed; but ultimately, a new treatment of the idea and
real meaning of Altizer’s belief that God had died is to be found in the word can be expected, however unexpected and surprising it
his belief in God’s immanence. To say that God has died is to say may turn out to be. That our traditional liturgical and theological
that he has ceased to exist as a transcendent, supernatural being. language needs a thorough overhaul; the reality abides, but classical
Rather, he has become fully immanent in the world. The result is an modes of thought and forms of language may well have had it. That
the Christian story is no longer a saving or a healing story. It may
66 67
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
manage to stay on as merely illuminating or instructing or guiding, was that modern theologies, by giving up the essential elements of
but it no longer performs its classical functions of salvation or Christian belief in God, had logically led to what were really
redemption. In this new form, it might help us cope with the demons, antitheologies. When the death of God theologies passed off the
but it cannot abolish them.2 scene, the commitment to secularism remained and manifested itself
For William Hamilton the death of God describes the event many in other forms of secular theology in the late 1960s and the 1970s.
have experienced over the last two hundred years. They no longer Reader Response Criticism
accept the reality of God or the meaningfulness of language about In recent decades, a great deal of biblical scholarly attention has
him. Nontheistic explanations have been substituted for theistic ones. been given to the reader’s literary, subjective experience of the text
This trend is irreversible, and everyone must come to terms with the of revelation. New literary criticism ponders the “world of the text.”
historical - cultural - death of God. God’s death must be affirmed It derives meaning solely from the literary impressions given by the
and the secular world embraced as normative intellectually and good text itself, devoid of any historical background. Reader response
ethically. Indeed, Hamilton was optimistic about the world, because criticism is similar to narrative criticism but enters into the world of
he was optimistic about what humanity could do and was doing to the reader as listener to the story of the text.
solve its problems.
Reader response criticism considers readers’ reactions to
Paul van Buren is usually associated with death of God theology, literature as vital to interpreting the meaning of the text. and their
although he himself disavowed this connection. But his disavowal experience of a literary work, in contrast to other schools and theories
seems hollow in the light of his book The Secular Meaning of the that focus attention primarily on the author or the content and form of
Gospel and his article “Christian Education Post Mortem Dei.” In the work. modern reader-response criticism began in the 1960s
the former he accepts empiricism and the position of Bultmann that and ’70s, particularly in the US and Germany, in works by Norman
the world view of the Bible is mythological and untenable to modern Holland, Stanley Fish, Wolfgng Iser,Hans-Robert JausssRoland
people. In the latter he proposes an approach to Christian education Barthes and others. However, reader-response criticism can take a
that does not assume the existence of God but does assume “the number of different approaches. A critic deploying reader-response
death of God” and that “God is gone.” theory can use a psychoanalytic lens, a feminist lens, or even a
Van Buren was concerned with the linguistic aspects of God’s structuralist lens. What these different lenses have in common when
existence and death. He accepted the premise of empirical analytic using a reader response approach is they maintain that what a text is
philosophy that real knowledge and meaning can be conveyed only cannot be separated from what it does.” Reader response criticism
by language that is empirically verifiable. This is the fundamental always stresses the importance of the reader’s role in interpreting
principle of modern secularists and is the only viable option in this texts. Rejecting the idea that there is a single, fixed meaning inherent
age. If only empirically verifiable language is meaningful, ipso facto in every literary work, this theory holds that the individual creates his
all language that refers to or assumes the reality of God is meaningless, or her own meaning through a “transaction” with the text based on
since one cannot verify God’s existence by any of the five senses. personal associations. Because all readers bring their own emotions,
Theism, belief in God, is not only intellectually untenable, it is concerns, life experiences, and knowledge to their reading, each
meaningless. In The Secular Meaning of the Gospel van Buren seeks interpretation is subjective and unique.
to reinterpret the Christian faith without reference to God. One searches Tyson explains that “...reader-response theorists share two beliefs:
the book in vain for even one clue that van Buren is anything but a secularist 1) that the role of the reader cannot be omitted from our
trying to translate Christian ethical values into that language game. understanding of literature and 2) that readers do not passively
In retrospect, it becomes clear that there was no single death of consume the meaning presented to them by an objective literary
God theology, only death of God theologies. Their real significance text; rather they actively make the meaning they find in literature.”3
68 69
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
The following are the frequently cited questions addressed reader they read, and subsequently use this reading to analyze the
response criticism:4 psychological response of the reader.
• How does the interaction of text and reader create meaning? 5. Social reader-response theory is Stanley Fish’s extension of
• What does a phrase-by-phrase analysis of a short literary his earlier work, stating that any individual interpretation of a
text, or a key portion of a longer text, tell us about the reading text is created in an interpretive community of minds consisting
experience prestructured by (built into) that text? of participants who share a specific reading and interpretation
• Do the sounds/shapes of the words as they appear on the strategy.
page or how they are spoken by the reader enhance or change 6. In all interpretive communities, readers are predisposed to a
the meaning of the word/work? particular form of interpretation as a consequence of strategies
• How might we interpret a literary text to show that the reader’s used at the time of reading.
response is, or is analogous to, the topic of the story? Wolfgang Iser argues that the text in part controls the reader´s
• What does the body of criticism published about a literary responses but contains gaps that the reader creatively fills. The inter
text suggest about the critics who interpreted that text and/or action between the implied author, implied reader, real author, real
about the reading experience produced by that text? reader and the narrator is important in conceiving the meaning of a
There are multiple approaches within the theoretical branch of text. He observes that there is a tension between the implied reader,
reader-response criticism, yet all are unified in their belief that the who is established by the response-inviting structures of the text
meaning of a text is derived from the reader through the reading (this type of reader is assumed and created by the work itself) and
process.5 Lois Tyson endeavors to define the variations into five the actual reader, who brings his/her own experiences and
recognized reader-response criticism approaches whilst warning that preoccupations to the text. The author creates a relationship with a
categorizing reader-response theorists explicitly invites difficultly due reader and enables him/her to discover the meaning of the text. The
to their overlapping beliefs and practices.6 tone of voice or features of the narrative voice imply what kind of
reader - in terms of knowledge and attitude is addressed, what
1. Transactional reader-response theory, led by Louise Rosenblatt kind of attention the book is requesting and what kind of relationship
and supported by Wolfgang Iser, involves a transaction of the narrator and the reader is assumed to be. The author puts
between the text’s inferred meaning and the individual him/herself into the narrator (3rd person godlike all-seer) or the
interpretation by the reader influenced by their personal 1st person child character and s/he comments on the events in the
emotions and knowledge. story in a specific way.
2. Affective stylistics, established by Stanley Fish, believe that a Death of the Author
text can only come into existence as it is read; therefore, a
text cannot have meaning independent of the reader. Death of the Author is a concept from literary criticism; it holds
that an author’s intentions and biographical facts (the author’s politics,
3. Subjective reader-response theory, associated with David religion, etc) should hold no weight in regards to an interpretation of
Bleich, looks entirely to the reader’s response for literary their writing. The pioneering work of Roland Barthes made this
meaning as individual written responses to a text are then concept popular.7 In other words, a writer’s interpretation of his
compared to other individual interpretations to find continuity own work is no more or less valid than the interpretations of any
of meaning. reader. The logic behind the concept is fairly simple: Books are
4. Psychological reader-response theory, employed by Norman meant to be read, not written, so the ways readers interpret them
Holland, believes that a reader’s motives heavily affect how are as important and “real” as the author’s intention. “The Death of
the Author” by Roland Barthes is a landmark for 20-th century
70 71
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
literature, literary theory, post-structuralism, and postmodernism. outside literature. Therefore, “discoveries” seem to exist as
The essay opposes the established trends “in ordinary culture […] possibilities predating their inventor, and the discoverer simply
tyrannically centered on the author, his person, his life,” and abolish “confirms” ideas that have already been there. Here more
the classical literary criticism that analyses a literary work within the than one person reaches the same discovery/idea/conclusion
biographical and personal context of the author of the work. The independently. Carl Jung’s idea of the collective unconscious is
philosophical implications of “The Death of the Author” transcend similar to multiple discovery - a series of archetypes collected
literature and are closely related to the postmodern trends of collapse throughout the course of evolution that guide different individuals
of meaning, inability of originality, the death of God, and multiple to experience, feel, think, and observe in similar patterns.
discovery.8 5. On the most metaphorical level, the death of the Author is the
The Death of the Author” rejects the idea of authorial intent, and death of God that Nietzsche talked about. The literary world
instead develops a reader-response critical theory: The reader is is a metaphor of the real world, which cannot and does not
the space on which all the quotations that make up a writing are operate on a pre-determined plan, meaning, or creator. We
inscribed without any of them being lost; a text’s unity lies not in its know now that a text is not a line of words releasing a single
origin but in its destination. The following ideas are attached to the ‘theological’ meaning (the ‘message’ of the Author-God), but
concept of the death of the Author: a multi-dimensional space in which a variety of writings, none
1. The notion of the death of the author denies the concept of of them original, blend and clash. The text is a tissue of
the originality of the author. The use of the word “quotations” quotations drawn from the innumerable centers of culture.
expresses the idea that a text cannot really be “created” or 6. The Death of The Author is the multiplicity of meaning -
“original” - it is always made up of an arrangement of therefore the ultimate collapse of meaning. It is the freedom
preexisting “quotations” or ideas. Therefore, the “author” is from the shackles of meaning and Author’s intention. The death
not really an author, but rather a “scriptor” who simply puts of the Author is also the inability to create, invent, or be original.
together preexisting texts. It is the spinning out of control into the abyss of multiple
2. In literary criticism, the death of the Author is the “death” of meanings and inevitable meaninglessness.
the omniscient writer and the author who calls attention to his The idea of death of the Author is rejected in toto by several
presence in the text. For example, the author should not scholars such as Camilla Paglia and Sean Burke. Camilla Paglia
address the readers with phrases such as “dear reader”; the argues: “Most pernicious of French imports [into American
author should not give information about the characters that academia] is the notion that there is no person behind a text.
cannot be known in a “real-life” situation - such as characters’ Is there anything more affected, aggressive, and relentlessly
thoughts and feelings. Another example is the use of “I” from concrete than a Parisian intellectual behind his/her turgid text?
the point of view of the author. The Parisian is a provincial when he pretends to speak for the
3. The death of the Author is the inability to create, produce, or universe.”9 Similarly, Literary theorist Sean Burke opposed
discover any text or idea. The author is a “scriptor” who simply the idea of death of the Author”, in a work pointedly entitled
collects preexisting quotations. He is not able to create or The Death and Return of the Author.10
decide the meaning of his work. The task of meaning falls “in This new literary approach had contributed remarkably to the idea
the destination” - the reader. of Biblical interpretation. The following observations are significant:
4. In culture, the death of the Author is the denial of a single § As the biblical authors are from ancient times their identity
“discoverer” or contributor. It is the equivalent of the “scriptor” and intentions are almost unknown to the present day reader.
72 73
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
The names of majority of the sacred authors are unknown to of codes, and threats to trustworthiness. In conventional content
us and nothing is known even regarding the authors whose analysis, coding categories are derived directly from the text data.
name is known to us. With a directed approach, analysis starts with a theory or relevant
§ Besides, this new approach helps us to understand the idea research findings as guidance for initial codes. A summative content
of the communitarian dimension of the authorship of certain analysis involves counting and comparisons, usually of keywords,
Biblical Books. Very often Biblical Books are reflecting the followed by the interpretation of the underlying context. The authors
psyche of a believing community rather than of an individual. delineate analytic procedures specific to each approach and
techniques addressing trustworthiness with hypothetical examples
§ The idea that author is only a scriptor is beneficial in conceiving drawn from the area of end-of-life care.
the new horizons of the idea of divine inspiration.
Subjective and Analytical approaches Endnotes
In postmodern times, two things must happen for us to restore a 1 The major works in this field are T.J Altizer, The Gospel of Christian
balanced study of the Bible which includes both subjective and Atheism (The Westminster Press, 1966); T J Altizer and W Hamilton,
analytical approaches. Radical Theology and the Death of God; S N Gundry and A F Johnson,
First, we must find a way to subjectively experience the Voice of eds., Tensions in Contemporary Theology; K Hamilton, God Is Dead:
God in the Bible without falling into an existential subjectivism. It is The Anatomy of a Slogan; P.M van Buren, “Christian Education Post
true that no Biblical criticism is possible without the touch of Mortem Dei”
subjectivism. Writing is a work in process. Certainly many decisions 2 T J Altizer and W Hamilton, Radical Theology and the Death of God, 12.
are consciously made by the author. Yet others simply flow from the
creative part of the brain without the author even realizing what s/he 3 Tyson, 154.4 Tyson 191.
has done. The command of language is intrinsic. The flow of words 5 M. Cahill, “‘Reader-response criticism and the allegorizing
simply happens. Thus, when a reader, sits down to analyze a book, reader’”. Theological Studies.57/1(1196): 89–97.
the first thing s/he must remember is that whatever answer s/he comes
up with, it is subjective. The subjective approach to a literary work 6 L. Tyson, Critical theory today: a user-friendly guide, 2nd edn
begins with personal interest in it. That is, when one has read a (Routledge: New York and London, 2006.
literary work he has encountered the statement of a certain 7 Roland Barthes, The Death of the Author, trans. Richard Miller (New
experience. Then he wants to respond to that experience through a York: Hill and Wang, 1974).
consideration of his own experience. 8 Lamos Ignoramous, The Death of The Author: Roland Barthes and
Secondly, we must find a way to analytically study the Bible The Collapse of Meaning, 2017, 3.
without resorting to the radical historical criticism of the past. This 9 Camille Paglia, Sexual Personae: Art and Decadence from Nefertiti to
approach would respect the historical basis of the faith without Emily Dickson (New York: Vintage, 1990) 34.
making biblical authority dependent upon historical criticism. Rather
than being a single method, current applications of content analysis 10 Sean Burke, The Death and Return of the Author: Criticism and
show three distinct approaches: conventional, directed, or summative. Subjectivity in Barthes, Foucault, and Derrida (3 ed.) (Edinburgh:
All three approaches are used to interpret meaning from the content University Press, 2010).
of text data and, hence, adhere to the naturalistic paradigm. The
major differences among the approaches are coding schemes, origins
74 75
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
1. The first factor is the designation of Dei Verbum as a “Dogmatic
Constitution” resulting from an Ecumenical Council. As per
the hierarchy of ecclesiastical texts, the Dogmatic Constitution
Chapter 7 is the weightiest in terms of authority. Of the many texts
produced at Vatican II, merely four were ranked as
Constitutions, and of these only one was ranked particularly
as a “Dogmatic Constitution” (i.e., Lumen Gentium).
Dei Verbum 2. A second factor concerns the topic of revelation. Dei Verbum
Vorlage of Formation is the first Conciliar document in the Church’s history Where
the topic of divine revelation was formally investigated on its
own. While Trent and Vatican I both promulgated teachings
related to this theme, neither addresses it in the formal way
that Vatican II does.
3. The Council’s own Doctrinal Commission made the judgment

A
t the heart of our Christian faith is the that, despite its later adoption, Dei Verbum should be
conviction that God has revealed himself to considered “in a way the first of all the constitutions of this
A human beings, in the creation itself, especially
in the humanity of Jesus, and in the biblical testimony
Council, so that its Preface introduces them all to a certain
extent.”2
of sages, poets, historians and prophets and apostolic 4. As Joseph Ratzinger had observed, we should not read Vatican
witnesses. This document is the most recent formal II as a more progressive movement resulting in the pastoral
expression of the Christian community’s understanding constitution Gaudium et spes (and other documents, such as
of this revelation. DV, as important as it is, is a relatively the ones about religious freedom, and the dialogue with the
short document, running to only 26 numbered other religions) – a movement which had to be continued after
paragraphs. So there is value in studying this document the council – but that we rather should read these last
as a whole. It has its own integrity and power. And it documents of the council in the framework of the dogmatic
has its own fascinating history of development during constitutions on the church and on revelation.3
the four years of the sessions of Vatican II. Knowing
5. The fourth reason to view Dei Verbum as the Council’s most
the document as a whole, along with its back story
important achievement concerns its implications for the
and a half century of responses and developments,
treatment of Sacred Scripture itself. It obviously accords
enables one to understand any reference to DV in its
rightful significance to the Bible as the special locus of divine
original context. communication or divine revelation.
Why is Dei Verbum Significant 6. A fifth reason to consider in evaluating the critical importance
Ronald D. Witherup points out Six reasons to of Dei Verbum is the careful balance it struck between
emphasise the importance of Dei Verbum:1 continuity and novelty. While it is true that Pope Benedict

76 77
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
XVI, in particular, insisted on viewing Vatican II in terms of its beliefs in Catholicism even clearer. Protestants endorse justification
continuity with all prior Church teachings, one cannot by faith alone (sola fide) apart from anything (including good works),
reasonably deny certain novelties in Dei Verbum. In fact dei a position the Catholic Church condemned as heresy. The Protestant
Verbum had opened a new way of theologizing. Reformers rejected the Apocrypha as part of the biblical canon.
Vorlage of DV (The term Apocrypha (Gr., hidden) is a collection of ancient Jewish
writings and is the title given to these books, which were written
Two councils and three documents have in fact paved the way between 300 and 30 B.C., in the era between the Old and New
for the DV. Regarding prior ecumenical councils, remember that Testaments). During the the fourth session, the Council issued a
before Vatican II, there were only two councils of the Roman Catholic decree damning anyone who rejected these books: “if any one
Church since the Renaissance - the Council of Trent (1546-53) and receive not, as sacred and canonical, the said books entire with all
the First Vatican Council (1869-70). Trent did not take up revelation their parts, as they have been used to be read in the Catholic Church,
as a topic but established definitively what counted as Sacred and as they are contained in the old Latin vulgate edition; and
Scripture (the canon, or normative list of 46 books for the Old knowingly and deliberately condemn the traditions aforesaid; let him
Testament and 27 books for the New Testament), affirmed God as be anathema.” Protestants claimed that the only source and norm
the ultimate author, gave priority to the Latin Vulgate over the original for the Christian faith was Holy Scripture (the canonical Bible without
languages, and emphasized the Church as the definitive interpreter the Apocrypha). The doctrine of Sola Scriptura was rejected at
of the Bible. Against the Lutheran stress on scripture alone as Trent. The Council affirmed two sources of special revelation: Holy
sufficient, from Trent forward the Roman Catholic church stressed Scripture (e.g., all the books included in the Latin Vulgate version)
tradition to forestall the errors that could arise from private and traditions of the church (including the “unwritten traditions”).
interpretation. This gave rise to the relative neglect of Bible study
among the laity, and even many of the clergy, for the next four First Vatican Council
centuries. Catholics read more about the Bible than the Bible itself. First Vatican Council in its decree entitled Dei Filius - Dogmatic
Vatican I affirmed the teachings of Trent. It did not go further. But, Constitution on the Catholic Faith – promulgated on April 24, 1870,
as we will see, Vatican II recast, renewed, and developed the theme in Session III, Chapter 2 explains the features of divine revelation
of revelation calling for a robust return to Scripture in the life of the The following nine points are the major canons of First Vatican
Church.4 council that shaped the biblical hermeneutics of the later era, including
Two councils and three documents contributed conspicuously to Dei Vrbum:
the stream of ideas that found their way into Dei Verbum. What 1. The source and end of all things, can be known with certainty
follows is a brief discussion on those councils and documents. from the consideration of created things, by the natural power
The Council of Trent of human reason : ever since the creation of the world, his
The Council of Trent was the most important event of the Catholic invisible nature has been clearly perceived in the things that
Counter-Reformation, the Catholic Church’s first significant reply have been made (Rm 1:20).
to the growing Protestants Reformation. The primary purpose of 2. It was, however, pleasing to his wisdom and goodness to
the council was to condemn and refute the beliefs of the Protestant, reveal himself and the eternal laws of his will to the human
such as Martin Luther and John Calvin, and also to make the set of race by another, and that a supernatural, way. This is how the

78 79
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
Apostle puts it : In many and various ways God spoke of old 9. In consequence, it is not permissible for anyone to interpret
to our fathers by the prophets; but in these last days he has Holy Scripture in a sense contrary to this, or indeed against
spoken to us by a Son (Hb 1:1-2). the unanimous consent of the fathers.
3. It is indeed due to this divine revelation, that those matters The major documents that shaped the vorlage and horizon of
concerning God which are not of themselves beyond the scope Dei Verbum are Providentissimus Deus, Divino Afflante Spiritu
of human reason, can, even in the present state of the human and Sancta Mater Ecclesia. A brief discussion on the focal points
race, be known by everyone without difficulty, with firm of these documents are given below.
certitude and with no intermingling of error.
• Providentissimus Deus (Nov. 18, 1893), by Leo XIII,
4. It is not because of this that one must hold revelation to be cautiously encouraged Catholic biblical scholars to take
absolutely necessary; the reason is that God directed human advantage of recent developments in the understanding of
beings to a supernatural end; indeed eye has not seen, neither ancient Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek, and of the variety of literary
has ear heard, nor has it come into our hearts to conceive forms in the cultural contexts, and also of Palestinian archeology
what things God has prepared for those who love him.
in their translations and interpretations of literature. He also
5. Now this supernatural revelation, is contained in written books established the Pontifical Biblical Commission to take up
and unwritten traditions, which were received by the apostles special questions regarding the interpretation of Scripture.
from the lips of Christ himself, or came to the apostles by the
dictation of the Holy Spirit. • Divino Afflante Spiritu (Sept. 30, 1943) by Pope Pius XII,
encouraged even more strongly the use of all available cultural
6. The complete books of the old and the new Testament with and linguistic tools to illuminate and interpret the word of God
all their parts, as they are listed in the decree of the said Council precisely as words of human beings in their specific times and
and as they are found in the old Latin Vulgate edition, are to places.
be received as sacred and canonical.
• Sancta Mater Ecclesia: An instruction on the Truth of the
7. These books the Church holds to be sacred and canonical not Gospels (April 21, 1964 - about a year and a half before the
because she subsequently approved them by her authority final session of Vatican II). In other words, towards the end
after they had been composed by unaided human skill, nor
of the process of writing the text of Dei Verbum, the Pontifical
simply because they contain revelation without error, but
Biblical Commission issued an important document on the
because, being written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit,
they have God as their author, and were as such committed history and tradition within the gospels. This document teaches
to the Church. that the four gospels each contain three different levels of
tradition: (1) the oral teaching of Jesus in his public ministry,
8. The decree declares as follows: that in matters of faith and (2) the post-Easter preaching of the apostles recounting the
morals, belonging as they do to the establishing of Christian deeds and words of Jesus, and (3) the written testimony of
doctrine, that meaning of Holy Scripture must be held to be the four evangelists, who collected, organized, edited, and
the true one, which Holy mother Church held and holds, since synthesized these oral and written traditions. This teaching is
it is her right to judge of the true meaning and interpretation of taken up into paragraph 12 of Dei Verbum.
Holy Scripture.
80 81
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
History of the Making of DV list of various drafts will give a glimpse on the heated discussion
taken place at the council on the making of this document.
It is well-known that Dei Verbum did not grow out of the schema
introduced to the Council’s bishops on the first day of its discussion. First draft was presented during the session held from Nov 14-
In reality, the Doctrinal Commission, led by its powerful head 21, 1962 entitled De Fontibus Revelationis. However this
Cardinal Alfredo Ottaviani, had carefully prepared the schema De document was rejected by the council at the voting. 2209 bishops
Fontibus (On the Sources of Revelation) between 1960 and 1962. voted against the first draft whereas 1368 bishops supported it.
Then Ottaviani himself introduced the schema to the bishops on 14 There was neither the two-thirds vote necessary to pass, nor to
November 1962. De Fontibus consisted of five chapters: The remove it. Pope John intervened to open the procedural dead lock,
Twofold Source of Revelation; The Inspiration, Inerrancy, and and announced the reworking of the draft. Holy Father appointed a
Literary Composition of Sacred Scripture; The Old Testament; The commission which consisted of Cardinal Afredo Ottaviani of the
CDF and the German Cardinal Augustine Bea representing the pro
New Testament; and The Sacred Scripture in the Church
and contra groups of the first draft. Discussions were held from
Concerning the Sacred Scriptures, the most recent document 1962 November 22 to December 7, consequently a new title was
with the highest level of authority in the Catholic Church is the suggested: De Divina Revelatione. Besides, the relation between
“Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation,” often referred to by Scripture and Tradition was reworked.
its Latin title, Dei Verbum(DV), which was officially promulgated
In his commentary on De Fontibus, Joseph Ratzinger states:
on November 18, 1965, by the bishops meeting at the Second
“All the relevant questions were decided in a purely defensive spirit:
Vatican Council. The constitution on Divine Revelation was intended
the greater extent of tradition in comparison with Scripture, a largely
to unearth the meaning and means of revelation from a Catholic verbalistic conception of the idea of inspiration, the narrowest
point of view. It was an accepted fact from the previous documents interpretation of inerrancy, a conception of the historicity of the
that revelation must be accepted at least in three stages. The primary Gospels that suggested that there were no problems, etc.”5
stage is God’s self-revelation in creation as envisioned in the Letter Regarding the rejection of the first draft, Ratzinger comments that
to the Romans chapter 1 which could rightly be called natural the real point was the basic question, “Should one continue the
revelation. The second stage of revelation is that of the Old Testament antimodernist attitude, the politics of closure, of condemnation, of
where the divine initiative of a covenantal relationship, granting of defensiveness, until one ends in complete fearful refusal, or shall the
the Law (Torah), the teachings of the Prophets (Nabiim), the church, once the necessary distinctions are made, turn to a new
experiencial findings of the Writings (Ketubim) are the sum and page, and step into a new, positive encounter with her sources, with
substance of this stage of revelation. The third stage of revelation is her brothers, with the world of today?” In answering this question,
the fullness of revelation through the life, teaching, death, resurrection Ratzinger concluded: precisely because the council chose the second
of Jesus and the emergence of the Church which are recorded in the option, Vatican II was called to be more than the continuation of
New Testament. Trent and Vatican I, but to engage in a more timely development of
It was from these traditional stand points that the making of Dei the issues at stake.6 A similar view is suggested by Pieter Smulders,
Verbum was envisioned. However it was a Herculean task, as it a Dutch theologian and commentator of the council proceedings, on
De Fontibus, “perceived such a one-sided insistence on revelation
underwent several challenging modifications. In fact the first draft,
as locutio divina that the schema leaves divine works, God’s opera
including its title was thoroughly reworked in later draft. The following
magnalia, outside revelation itself.”7
82 83
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
As the history of the Council unfolded on 14 November 1962, December 1962, the Commission’s members generally agreed upon
Achille Liénart was the first bishop to reject the schema: “It is a new title De Divina Revelatione. There was a tendency on the
unacceptable,” he said.8 Liénart stated that De Fontibus must be part of a group of French and Italian bishops, led by Archbishop
completely revised because it misconstrued the teaching of Trent on Ermenegildo Florit, to incorporate the main themes of De Fontibus
the relation between scripture and tradition. When Lienart finished, into The Constitution on the Church. However, on 4 December
Joseph Frings, Jan Bernard Alfrink, Joseph Elmer Ritter, Maximos 1963, in his closing speech at the end of the second session, the
IV Saigh, and Émile-Joseph De Smedt one after another criticized newly selected Pope Paul VI indicated that the subject of revelation
De Fontibus during a week of debate. By contrast, the bishops should remain as an independent text. Therefore the discussion
Quiroga y Palacios, Ernesto Ruffini, and Giuseppe Siri defended remained as the unfinished agenda of the second session.
the schema as the legitimate text for further discussion. Finally, on 1. Second Draft was presented in the Synod on 1963 March
20 November 1962, 1368 bishops of the Council voted to 27. It was send for discussions on April 22, 1963. This draft
discontinue the debate, while 822 bishops voted to continue the emphasized the relation between Tradition and Scripture.
discussion of the schema. Following the enigma created by the voting Many other new suggestions were also put forward. Written
Pope John XXIII asked to revise the entire document. responses to the draft on revelation were submitted between
As Shelkens points out, indeed, the refutation of the preparatory June 1963 and January 1964. In light of these submissions, a
scheme ‘is generally considered to be a benchmark moment, a special sub-committee of the Commission began to work on
symbolic incident that signaled the separation of the Council from the draft on 7 March 1964. Under the influence of Yves
the influence of the Curia – or at least from the clutches of the Holy Congar, Karl Rahner, and Pieter Smulders, divine revelation
Office.’9 As Lieve Boeve observes, It reflected too much the Roman was now considered as God’s self-communication in both
Neo-scholastic theology and dealt in a very defensive way with the words and deeds. According to Ratzinger, who was one of
discussions and controversies of the past: a disequilibrium between the commission’s members, the notion of the development of
tradition and Scripture to the advantage of the former; a verbalist tradition made its first appearance in this period under the
conception of Scripture’s inspiration; a very strict interpretation of heading De Sacra Traditione. It was an attempt to meet the
its inerrancy (in religious as well as in secular affairs); a naive historicist widely expressed need of the bishops for a clear and positive
view of the gospels; and, because of this, an over-critical attitude account of tradition.
towards, and even condemnation of, modern exegesis.10 Some 62 2. Third Draft came to the floor of the Synodal Hall during the
per cent of the bishops evaluated the preparatory schema as unfitting session held from September 30 to October 6, 1964. An
to develop a constitution on revelation. Although this, according to introduction and the last chapter were added to second draft.
conciliar rules, did not constitute the necessary two-thirds majority New suggestions were again put forward.
to withdraw the preparatory schema, Pope John XXIII nevertheless 3. Fourth Draft of the document was presented in the Synod
decided to do so, and installed a ‘mixed’ theological commission to during the session September 20-22, 1965. Further suggestion
prepare a new proposal. on the issues of Tradition, historicity, inerrancy was made in
René Latourelle states that the intervention of Pope John “was a the discussions. With the corrections the draft was again
turning point in the Council.” When the new Commission was presented in 1965, Oct 29. The final draft was voted on Nov
established, it was inclined toward consensus, and dodged 18. 1965 and won the approval of 2344 bishops against 350
disagreement among its members. Between 25 November and 7 who voted against it.
84 85
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
2. Since God’s self[disclosure in deeds and words is both prior
Schema of the First Draft Schema of the Final Draft to the writing of and sustained throughout the writing of
De Fontibus Revelationis (On Dei Verbum (The Word of God)
the Sources of Revelation) Prologue (numbered section 1)
Scriptures during the history of the covenant people of God,
the council fathers bypass two-source terminology and use
Chap. 1 The Double Sources Chap. 1 Divine Revelation the concept revelation to refer to the single ultimate source
of Revelation Itself revelation - God. So they call the first chapter Divine
Revelation Itself.
Chap. 2 The Inspiration, Chap. 2 Transmission of Divine 3. Since the council fathers recognize that divine revelation is an
Inerrancy, and Literary Form Revelation
ongoing process entailing both God and humans as authors,
of Scripture
they discuss the issues named in the first draft’s chapter two.
Chap. 3 Sacred Scripture: Its Though the title is retained the content is treated in the larger
Divine inspiration and context of their understanding of revelation. They do this not
Interpretation ( in one but in two chapters, one on the transmission of divine
revelation before and after the writing of Biblical texts and the
Chap. 3 The Old Testament Chap. 4 The Old Testament ( other on the specific issues of inspiration and interpretation.

Chap. 4 The New Testament Chap. 5 The New Testament 4. Knowing that the term ‘inerrancy’ has become associated
with a fundamentalist notion that Scripture is inerrant even in
Chap. 5 Holy Scripture in the Chap. 6 Sacred Scripture in matters of science and secular history they omit the term and
Church the Life of the Church say rather that Scripture is without error with respect to truth
necessary for salvation.
First of all we should notice the similarities between the first and What cannot be underestimated, then, is the importance of the
the final drafts: Though the treatments of the topics are different, insertion of a first chapter on revelation itself, immediately prior to a
both versions deal with divine revelation. Besides, The three final consideration of Scripture and tradition, that occurred during the
chapters of both drafts cover the same material - the Old Testament, drafting of the constitution. It was Ratzinger himself, who together
the New Testament, and the function of Scripture in the Church. with Rahner drafted an alternative proposal, who had a major impact
Regarding the differences between the two versions of document on the final version of the constitution. This made, for example, J.L.
the following observation are significant: Allen conclude that Dei verbum is the conciliar document upon which
the personal influence of Ratzinger was the most explicit.11 The
1. The titles are different: The change in the title from ‘the sources criticism of theologians such as Edward Schillebeeckx, Karl Rahner
of revelation’ to ‘the word of God’ show that the bishops and Yves Congar was also very influential in these events.12
recognized that the traditional treatment of Scripture and
Tradition, which arose in Roman Catholic vs. Protestant Indeed, a crucial distinction is made between (a) the occurrence
debates, had oversimplified matters and failed to recognize of revelation in history and (b) the way in which Scripture and tradition
that scripture and tradition are symbiotic, i.e., interdependent, bear witness to this revelatory occurrence (as their common divine
and must be discussed as such. source). This distinction remains an important hermeneutical principle
for every encounter with the signs, deeds, words, texts and doctrines
86 87
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
that signify this ‘economy of revelation [revelationis oeconomia’ - even more clearly everything we need to know about God
DV 2]. “As a consequence, Scripture, so to speak, belongs to and our world, about life and love, about forgiveness and
tradition – to the church’s handing-on of the gospel. At the same salvation.
time, tradition should be understood as the proclamation, explanation The document also deals extensively with Tradition. After briefly
and diffusion of the Word of God as it has been written down under presenting this broader concept of Revelation, but still before
the inspiration of the divine Spirit in Scripture, entrusted by Christ addressing the written scriptures, Catholic teachings explain the
and the Holy Spirit to the apostles, and transmitted to their Transmission of Divine Revelation, that is, the process by which
successors (DV 9)”13 God’s revelation is transmitted or handed down or passed on
Major Themes Addressed in Dei Verbum (Latin traditio) through the ages. Again, this is a complex process
involving several different stages or steps, which one must carefully
1. Revelation and Tradition distinguish from one another. The following stages apply both in the
Official Catholic teachings about the Bible do not deal immediately OT era and in the NT era:
with the written scriptures, but begin from a much broader 1. Historical Events: the actions of the patriarchs, prophets, kings,
perspective, first presenting the Church’s teachings about Revelation. and all the people of Israel (in the OT era), or the actions of
In Catholic understanding, divine revelation is much more than just Jesus, his own disciples and apostles (in the NT era).
the Bible; it is also more than God revealing verbal messages to
humanity. Rather, it is the entire process by which God reveals or 2. Oral Traditions: the stories about what happened, and the
teachings of various people, as passed down from one
expresses Himself in our world, what we might call God’s self-
generation to the next, often by anonymous people.
revelation. Moreover, this process of divine revelation can be seen
in four main historical stages: 3. Written Documents: the various books of Moses, the prophets,
and teachers of Israel (in the OT); and the recorded Gospels,
1. God’s self-revelation in creation, in everything that exists in letters, and other writings of early Christian leaders (in the
the universe, from inanimate material, to plants and animals, NT).
in what we today call nature.
4. Canonization and Interpretation: the transmission of God’s
2. God’s self-revelation in and to the human race, who are created revelation did not end with the writing of the individual books
in God’s image and likeness (see Gen 1:26-27), so we are of the Bible, but continues in the activity of the Church, first in
endowed with reason, which gives us the ability to know God. collecting and canonizing the collections of scriptures we now
call the Old and New Testaments, as well as in the ongoing
3. God’s special revelation to the people of Israel, the chosen
teaching, interpretation, and application of God’s revelation
people, giving them more direct knowledge about God and
in the lives of individuals and communities throughout the
the world, working in and through their history, sending them
centuries.
messages that were passed down orally and eventually written
down in the Hebrew Bible (the Old Testament). 2. Importance of the Scripture
4. God’s self-revelation in the person of Jesus Christ, the Word Only after understanding the Catholic teachings about Revelation
made flesh (see John 1:14), sent from the Father (cf. John and Tradition we can come to a proper understanding of the Church’s
5:17-37; 14:6-28), who through his words and actions reveals teachings about the Bible, the Sacred Scriptures. Dei Verbum

88 89
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
systematically explores the intertwined relationships writing of the NT books (by several decades), but it was the
between Revelation, Tradition, and Scripture: early Church that determined the Canon of the Bible (not until
1. Contrary to the polemical Reformation-era debates, Scripture several centuries after Jesus’ life).
and Tradition are not opposed to each other; they are not two 3. Inspiration
separate entities. Rather, Scripture (the written Bible) is part of Chapter 3 of DV (and the corresponding paragraphs of CCC),
the larger reality called Tradition (the transmission of divine also summarize the Catholic Christian teachings about the divine
truth), which is itself part of the larger process called Revelation inspiration of the Scriptures and their proper interpretation. In
(or better, God’s self-revelation ). Expressed with contrast to a naïve fundamentalist view of biblical authorship, which
mathematical symbols, one might say Revelation > Tradition sometimes reduces the role of the biblical writers to little more than
> Scripture. dictation machines, the Catholic understanding of the divine
2. Although the Bible is obviously a very old and crucial part of inspiration of the Bible is a good example of the Church’s
the Church’s Tradition, handing on God’s Revelation, it is not overall approach to theology:
the only part. Much of God’s self-revelation has been and
continues to be handed on to humanity through other aspects 1. The Bible is both the Word of God and written in human
of the Church’s Tradition (esp. the liturgy), and even more languages. On can properly say both that God is the author
broadly in various ways. Put differently, although the Scriptures of the scriptures and that the human writers acted as real
contain Revelation, not all of God’s self-revelation is recorded authors. They did not merely record the exact words whispered
in the Bible (since God has revealed and continues to reveal into their ears by the Holy Spirit (as graphically portrayed in
Himself in nature, in people, and in many other ways). much medieval art), but rather made use of their own human
abilities in writing their texts (under the inspiration of the Holy
3. However, since the Bible contains the indispensible core of Spirit, of course).
God’s Revelation, so to speak, Christians believe that no other
revelations would ever change or contradict what God 2. Because the Bible is written in human languages
teaches us in and through the Old and New Testaments. (indeed, ancient languages very different from our own!), the
Moreover, as the core of Revelation, the Bible contains all proper interpretation of the Scriptures requires not only that
the truths necessary for our redemption and salvation, so that we are aware of the limitations of all human language (and the
we neither seek nor need any other revelation to supplement difficulties of translation from one language to another), but
or complete God’s revelation as found in the Scriptures. also that we pay attention to the various literary forms and
4. It is also crucial to understand that the Word of God, in Catholic modes of expression used by the ancient authors (see the
understanding, is not primarily the Bible (the written text), but relevant excerpts highlighted below).
is Jesus Christ (the incarnate Word). The most important part 3. The inspiration of the Holy Spirit applies not only to one
of Christian faith is not the Bible, but Jesus himself. Jesus stage, but to all stages in the long process of the transmission
came before the Bible (before the NT books were written, of divine revelation. Not only were Moses, the prophets,
and before the complete scriptures were canonized). Jesus, the apostles, and other biblical characters inspired by
5. Moreover, the Church also came before the Bible! That is, the Holy Spirit in their words and actions; not only were the
not only did the oral preaching of the apostles precede the biblical authors inspired by God’s Spirit as they were busy

90 91
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
writing; not only was the Church leaders inspired by the Spirit 5. The Bible and Morality: Biblical Roots of Christian Conduct,
when they selected which books to include in the biblical canon. PBC (2008).
Rather, the Holy Spirit was active at all these stages of the 6. Verbum Domini, Benedict XVI (2010), the apostolic
process. exhortation commenting on 2008 Synod Bishops on the Word
4. Finally, the Holy Spirit continues to guide the Christian Church of God. It is a development of the final chapter of Dei Verbum.
in the correct understanding and proper application of the 7. Evangelii Gaudium, Pope Francis (2013). This apostolic
scriptures for our own lives in community and as individuals. exhortation following upon the 2012 bishops synod on the
Although this goes beyond the traditional doctrine of the divine New Evangelization. Though not specifically on Sacred
inspiration of sacred scripture, one can properly say that the Scripture, this document draws upon Scripture throughout
Holy Spirit still actively guides the Church in its use of the and includes a powerful section on the preparation of biblically
scriptures in many ways: in liturgical prayer, in small-group based homilies.
discussions, in personal prayer and study, and in many other 8. The Inspiration and Truth of Sacred Scripture, PBC (2014).
facets of our individual and communal lives. Benedict XVI had asked the PBC to examine in detail this
Conclusion: The Effects of Dei Verbum question.
The tension between historical criticism and canonical criticism 9. Above and beyond, summarizing the Church’s official teachings
was taken to new horizons by Dei Verbum, which advocated for on Divine revelation is found in the Catechism of the Catholic
the mutual interdependency of both. Ratzinger has insistently Church (CCC, 1994). Catechism of the Catholic Church does
accentuated the limits of the historical-critical methods in favour of a great job of summarizing the teaching of Dei Verbum within
an ecclesial ‘canonical’ exegesis. It is evident that Dei verbum its account of the long tradition of the Church, especially in
explicitly makes the connection between these two approaches, but Part I, The Profession of the Faith. It also integrates the
it also stresses their mutual interdependency.14 teaching of Dei Verbum throughout the whole of the Catechism,
Besides, Dei Verbum paved the way for several magisterial citing or paraphrasing DV some 77 times. Not only does
documents that shaped the guidelines of biblical interpretation. The the Catechism clearly present the same teachings as Dei
following are the major documents: Verbum, but the structure of this CCC chapter closely parallels
the structure of DV:
1. Scripture and Christology, Pontifical Biblical Commission
[PBC] (1984) 1. Article 1 of this portion of the CCC (§§51-73) expands
upon the teachings of chapter 1 of DV.
2. The Interpretation of the Bible in the Church, PBC (1993). It
examines and evaluates the whole spectrum of methods of 2. Article 2 of the CCC (§§74-100) further develops the
biblical studies up to that year. material presented in chapter 2 of DV.
3. Catechism of the Catholic Church (2nd ed.) par. 101[141, 3. Article 3 of the CCC (§§101-141) summarizes the main
John Paul II (1997). A convenient summary of the teaching points of chapters 3-6 of DV.
on revelation and Scripture. To summarize, the salient features of Dei Verbum are the following:
4. The Jewish People and Their Sacred Scriptures in the Christian (i) it redefined the relationship between revelation and tradition, (ii)
Bible, PBC (2002). the normativity of the written scripture was re-affirmed, (iii) the
principles of Biblical interpretation were formulated.
92 93
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
Endnotes
1 For details see Ronald D. Witherup, The Word of God at Vatican
II: Exploring Dei Verbum (Minneapolis, MS: Liturgical Press, 2014).
2 Ormond Rush, “Toward a Comprehensive Interpretation of the Council
and Its Documents,” in Theological Studies 73:3 (2012): 568.
Chapter 8
3 See J. Ratzinger, ‘Bilanz der Nachkonzilszeit – Misserfolge, Aufgaben,
Hoffnungen’, in J. Ratzinger, Theologische Prinzipienlehre: Bausteine
zur Fundamentaltheologie (Münich: Wewel, 1982) 395.
4 Ronald D. Witherup, The Word of God at Vatican II: Exploring Dei
Verbum (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 2014).
5 Joseph Ratzinger, “Origin and Background,” edited by H. Vorgrimler,
Principles of Interpretation
Commentary on the Documents of Vatican II, vol. 3 (New York: Herder
and Herder, 1969), 159.
6 See J. Ratzinger, Die erste Sitzungsperiode des Zweiten Vatikanischen
Konzils: ein Rückblick (Cologne: Bachem, 1963) 38–41.
7 Jared Wicks “Vatican II on Revelation – From Behind the Scenes,”
Theological Studies 71 (2010), 643.
8 For a detailed discussion see
n the Catholic understanding, Cardinal Avery
9 K. Schelkens, Catholic Theology of Revelation on the Eve of Vatican II:
A Redaction History of the Schema De fontibus revelationis (1960–62)
(Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2010, p. 2
10 Lieven Boeve, “Revelation, Scripture and Tradition: Lessons from
I Dulles states, the Bible is not self-sufficient. It does
not determine its own contents, vouch for its own
inspiration, or interpret itself. The Bible is God’s gift to
the Church, which is its custodian and authoritative
Vatican II’s Constitution Dei verbum for Contemporary Theology,”
International Journal of Systematic Theology 13 ( 2011) 416-432, 417. interpreter.1 The Councils of Trent and Vatican I clearly
11 See J.L. Allen, Cardinal Ratzinger (New York: Continuum, 2000), p. 56. made these points. In summary fashion Vatican II
declared that tradition, Scripture, and the magisterium
12 For more information regarding this and the redaction process of Dei
verbum, see R. Burigana, La bibbia nel concilio. La redazione della “are so linked and joined together that one cannot stand
costituizione ‘Dei verbum’ del Vaticano II (Bologna: Il Mulino, 1998), without the others” (Dei Verbum 10). In other words,
pp. 110–14; G. Alberigo and J.A. Komonchak, History of Vatican II, nothing is believed on the authority of tradition alone,
vol. 2 (Leuven: Peeters, 1997), pp. 69–93, 233–66; the contribution of Scripture alone, or the magisterium alone. Dei Verbum
Helmut Hoping on Dei verbum in P. Hünermann & J. Hilberath, eds.,
Herders Theologischer Kommentar zum Zweiten Vatikanischen 12, which lays down the principles for the Catholic
Konzil, vol. 3 (Freiburg: Herder, 2005), pp. 716–35. interpretation of Scripture, is of great importance but
13 Boeve, “Scripture, Tradition”423. has often been misunderstood.2
14 J. Ratzinger, ‘Schriftauslegung im Widerstreit. Zur Frage nach Failure to do justice to the principles of interpretation
Grundlagen und Weg der Exegese heute’, in J. Ratzinger, ed., suggested by Dei Verbum is detrimental to the integrity
Schriftauslegung im Widerstreit (Freiburg: Herder, 1989), pp. 15–44.
of Catholic faith. As Joseph Ratzinger had pointedly
stated, “the post-conciliar reception has practically

94 95
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
dismissed the theological parts of its statements as a concession to more profoundly. For instance, the dogma of the Immaculate
the past and has taken the text simply as an unqualified official Conception permits a deeper understanding of the expression
confirmation of the historical-critical method. One may reckon such “full of grace” (kécharitôménê) applied to Mary by the angel
a one-sided reception of the Council in the profit column of the at the Annunciation. This is usually called regressive movement
ledger insofar as the confessional differences between Catholic and as it moves from the developed dogma to the biblical source.
Protestant exegesis virtually disappeared after the Council. The debit As Alois Grillmeier correctly comments on Dei Verbum: “There
aspect of this event consists in the fact that by now the breach is here a reciprocal relationship: the living tradition of the Church
between exegesis and dogma in the Catholic realm has become helps us through its growing understanding of faith to a deeper
total and that even for Catholics Scripture has become a word from understanding of Scripture. An ever renewed rereading of Scripture,
the past, which every individual tries to transport into the present in however, must become the soul of theology and of the whole of
his own way, without being able to put all too much trust in the raft tradition, so that everything can be led back to the unified fullness of
on which he sets himself.”3 the beginning, where everything was still “together.”5
Dei Verbum 12 proposes three norms: the unity of Scripture, the The earlier interpretations given by the magisterium which were
tradition of the Church, and analogy of faith. In what follows we will found unsound remains as a stumbling block against the teaching of
summarize these three concepts: Dei Verbum and earlier councils on the authority of the magisterium.
1. By affirming the unity of Scripture, Dei Verbum treats the Bible One might think in this connection of some arguments used to
in its entirety as a single book, inspired by God. As Avery condemn Galileo’s heliocentrism, or other cosmological
Dulles states, “It is God’s Word inasmuch as God has made interpretations given on the basis of the Bible. Avery Dulles argues
himself its author by way of inspiration. Because inspiration that, this breakdown is due to failure in distinguishing the “salutary
affects all the authors as a group, it is not a merely individual meaning” of Scripture and scientific assumptions derived by
phenomenon. It guarantees that the Bible, taken as a whole, interpreters of the sacred writers.6 The CDF document Donum
provides a solid foundation on which the Church may found Veritatis conceded that some pastoral decisions (“prudential
her beliefs, her moral system, and her life of worship.”4 judgments”) by the magisterium “might not be free from all
deficiencies.”7 The document continues that some judgments of the
2. Dei Verbum insists on the necessity of the “living tradition,” magisterium could be justified at the time in which they were made,
and of the magisterium as its locus, for discerning the divinely because while the pronouncements contained true assertions and
intended meaning. An example would be the Catholic practice others which were not sure, both types were inextricably connected.
of attributing the words of Jesus to Peter as addressed likewise Only time has permitted discernment and, after deeper study, the
to the successors of Peter, the popes (Matt. 16:18–19). attainment of true doctrinal progress.” As Dulles righly points out,
3. The third criterion is the analogy of faith (analogia fidei). It tensions, however, still can and do arise, particularly in cases when
means, the believer a priori knows that God could not inspire technical exegetes and hierarchical officials go beyond their specific
a meaning that was contrary to the truth embodied in the spheres of competence and responsibility.8
dogmas of the Church. Consequently, dogmas serve as Regarding the interpretation of the text Dei Verbum judiciously
negative norms for excluding misinterpretations. What is cautions us of the importance of the true relationship between critical
contradicting the dogma cannot be the right interpretation of exegesis and theological exegesis. Although tensions sometimes arise,
the text. Sometimes the dogma helps to understand a text the normal relationship, foreseen in Dei Verbum, is one of
96 97
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
cooperation. Biblical scholars on the basis of their historical-critical 3. The Context of Living Faith: The Bible must be read within the
methods are best equipped to establish what the words meant to context of the living faith of the Church upon which the Holy Spirit
the inspired authors and their immediate readers. But theological came at Pentecost. Christ did not give us the Bible directly: he gave
exegetes through canonical criticism, tradition-criticism, and dogmatic us the Church, and it was out of the Church that the New Testament
exegesis, are needed to confirm, qualify, or enrich the findings of later arose. “Sacred Scripture is written principally in the Church’s
historical-critical scholarship so that the Church may be effectively heart, rather than in documents and records, for the Church carries
guided by the Word of God. in her Tradition the living memorial of God’s Word, and it is the
Holy Spirit who gives her the spiritual interpretation of Scripture.”
The co-operation between pastors, theologians and scripture (Catechism, 113) It is our sense of the unity of the whole faith,
scholars are quite essential for biblical interpretation. As Pope sometimes called “the analogy of faith,” that allows us to interpret
Benedict observes, “Science alone cannot provide us with a definitive rightly any portion of it. (Catechism, 114) For example, if we want
and binding interpretation. . . . A greater mandate is necessary for to know how to interpret the scriptural references to the Eucharist,
this, which cannot derive from human abilities alone. The voice of we will be guided by our living faith in the Eucharist, which we
the living Church is essential for this, of the Church entrusted until Christians have celebrated since long before the Gospel was put
the end of time to Peter and the college of the apostles.”9 When into written form.
biblical scholars, theologians, and pastoral leaders work in harmony, The following are the seven principles of biblical interpretation.
the Church as a whole advances in its penetration of the Word of
God. 1. Identify the kind of literature your text is for insight into its
meaning.
The Principles of Interpretation
Bible scholars call this the genre of the text. That means the
Besides the three norms interpretation we can discuss three general form the text takes—narrative, prophecy, poetry, history,
grounds of interpretation. gospel, epistle. The various kinds of literature present their message
1. The Principle of Completeness: No single verse of the Bible, in differing styles and with different structure. Narrative texts do not
taken by itself, expresses the whole of God’s plan. You can prove operate the same way epistles do in getting their message across to
anything by taking verses here and there out of context. Keep in the reader.
mind the context of the whole book, and of the other books of the The variety in literary forms can become a complicated study.
Bible. Bible scholars go beyond the basic forms I mentioned here to
2. The Norm of Christ: “Different as the books which comprise subforms with subtle differences the ordinary reader might not notice.
Often they disagree with one another about these subtleties. In spite
it may be, Scripture is a unity by reason of the unity of God’s plan,
of these technical distinctions, the preacher can still recognize the
of which Christ Jesus is the center and heart, open since his
text’s form and how it affects the meaning.
Passover.” (Catechism, 112) The Old Testament has a value on its
own, but Christians can see in it the foreshadowing of Christ. When 2. Consider the context of the passage for a better
disturbed by some things in the Old Testament (e.g. violence, understanding of its meaning.
ritualistic concerns, harsh laws), we should see them in the context This is often considered the first and most important principle for
of the final revelation in Jesus. accurate interpretation. Bible scholars use the term context to discuss
98 99
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
various aspects of the original writing of the text—historical, social, “All scripture is God-breathed” (2 Tim. 3:16 NIV). The same Holy
political, religious, literary. It is this literary concern I have in mind as Spirit who inspired these words in the first place wants this message
the context of the passage. to be preached again through your sermon. And you want to preach
in a way that is in line with the Spirit’s purposes.
The writer follows a logical line of thought in what he writes.
What he said in the previous verses or chapters and what he said in 5. Look carefully at the language of the text for what it reveals
the ones that follow will help make the text in question clear. Taking about its meaning.
the text out of that context risks misinterpreting it. Often clues in the Words carry thoughts. The words of the text are all we have of
surrounding verses will open aspects of the meaning in your text you the writer’s thoughts. If he hadn’t written it down, we wouldn’t know
would have otherwise missed. what he was thinking. So we can look closely at his words, examining
3. Read the text for its plain and obvious meaning. each one carefully for the part it plays in his message. Also look at
how the words and phrases connect with one another and how the
A common and persistent myth about the Bible is that its real sentences are constructed.
meaning is hidden behind the surface message. Even though the Bible
uses symbolic or figurative language, most of it is clear to the reader. If you can study the text in the original language, you can gain
Even when you do not know about the people, places, and events greater insight into the meaning. Many preachers study Greek and
in question, you can grasp the point of the text. Hebrew for that reason. But even if you cannot read your texts in
those languages, you can still use lexicons and word study books to
The use of figurative language in Scripture only enhances the guide you. Though your congregation is probably not interested in
plain meaning of the text. “Why do you complain about the splinter the Hebrew and Greek, your study will open insights that will make
in your brother’s eye when you have a plank in your own eye?” the message clearer to them. You can do this without going into
Jesus said (Matt. 7:3 NIV). Even though this is figurative language, detail about tenses and forms in the original languages.
we have no trouble understanding what he meant. His use of the
metaphors makes it even clearer. 6. Notice the various theological themes in the text.
4. Try to discern the writer’s intentions when he wrote the Though a text has one intended meaning, it can have a number of
text. significant theological themes. It can also have a number of different
applications. When you do the structural diagram and your
This principle of intentionality is critical for the expository preacher. observations, you will list these themes and what the text says about
You study the text not to find a sermon in it but to discover the them. Identifying these themes and understanding how they relate to
writer’s intended message. Unless you can learn the intended meaning one another in your text is a most helpful key to grasping its meaning.
of the text writer, you will not be able to preach the message of the
text in your sermon. Remember, “The text cannot mean what it never These same theological themes will show up in different
meant.” Discovering the writer’s original meaning is your first task combinations in various texts throughout the Bible. In your preaching
text you will try to discover the best wording for the
as you prepare to preach to your own generation.
writer’s subject and the modifier that limits and focuses it. You will
The intended meaning of the text writer will also be the intended also look through the text for the predicates, the various things the
meaning of the Holy Spirit who inspired him to write. As you read writer is saying about his subject. The theological themes in the text
his words, you are dealing with a revelation from God. Remember, will give you what you need for these tasks.
100 101
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
7. Always take a God-centered perspective for interpreting
your text.
This means looking at the text in terms of what it reveals about
God and his dealings with his creation, particularly man. This is
theological interpretation. It arises from the assumption that the Bible Chapter 9
is really God’s means of making himself known to us. What it says
about him will always be central to every text.
The Bible was not given by God to tell us about ancient religious
people and how we should all try to be like them. It was given to tell
us about the faithful God whom they either served or denied. Their Towards
response is not the central message; God’s will and his involvement
with his creation are. Even texts that give instructions as to how we a Biblical Epistemology
should behave reveal something about God.

Endnotes
1 Avery Dulles, “Vatican II on the Interpretation of Scripture,” Letter &
Spirit 2 (2006): 17–26.

T
he word epistemology is from two Greek
2 See Ronald”D.”Witherup, The Word of God at Vatican II: Exploring words: episteme, knowledge in the sense of
“Dei Verbum” (Collegeville,MN: Liturgical Press, 2014).
science, and logia, knowledge in the sense of
3 Joseph Ratzinger, ed., Schriftaus legung im Widerstreit. Quaestiones
Disputatae 117 (Freiburg: Herder, 1989), 20–21. arranging that which is known in order. Literally
translated, the word epistemology means the
4 Dulles, “Vatican II on the Interpretation of Scripture,”21.
knowledge of knowing. The questions like “What is
5 Alois Grillmeier, “The Divine Inspiration and the Interpretation of Sacred knowledge?” or “What causes human knowledge?”
Scripture,” in Commentary on the Documents of Vatican II, ed. Herbert
Vorgrimler, 5 vols. (New York: Herder and Herder, 1969), 3:199–246, at How do we evaluate that we are self-conscious, self-
245. contemplating, rational beings? Merely because we
6 Dulles, “Vatican II on the Interpretation of Scripture,”24. have the capacity to contemplate on ourselves does
not resolve the matter. his effect must have a cause. In
7 Donum Veritatis, Instruction on the Ecclesial Vocation of the Theologian
(May 24, 1990), 24, in L’Osservatore Romano, Weekly Edition in English order to be an adequate cause, the Cause must be
(July 2, 1990), 1. self-conscious, self-contemplating, volitional, personal,
8 Dulles, “Vatican II on the Interpretation of Scripture,” 26. intellectual, and moral.
9 Pope Benedict XVI, Homily at Mass of Possession of the Chair of the The concept of epistemology is related to reality,
Bishop of Rome (May 7, 2005), in Origins 35 (May 26, 2005): 26–28, at 28 metaphysics, linguistics and hermeneutics. The
following chart evinces this fact:

102 103
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
Reality – That which is (i) The knower and the known are not independent of each other,
Metaphysics – What is that which is because the knower brings with her/him pre-understanding
Epistemology – How do we know that which is to the known. Not all inquiries are value-free and neutral.
Linguistics – How do we communicate knowledge This relationship between the knower and the known is the
Hermeneutics – How do we understand what is communicated key concept behind Heidegger‘s philosophy.
The diagram shows that to talk about reality is to know the reality. (ii) As a result, time and context-free generalizations are not
To know the reality means an attempt to understand the reality possible. Rather than there being an independent cause
Modernist‘s epistemology (in particular, Logical Positivism) is preceding an effect, cause and effect mutually shape each
based on classical foundationalism, an epistemic position that claims other. It is therefore impossible to distinguish between them.
that a belief system must be supported by evidence. Not any type (iii) Realities then are merely human constructs, temporary
of evidence, but evidence that must be certain and indubitable. There hypotheses that change with time, and are pluralistic. No one
are two sources that they appeal to, namely;1 can claim his/her hypothesis is correct as all are equally valid.
(i) Empiricism- a method that depends on cognitive-perception, Epistemology convinces that wo/man does recognize that his/her
and derives from information that has been collected under self-conscious, cognitive, and rational faculty is an effect which he
rigid conditions, variables that are operationally defined, and himself did not cause. The human will by which man decides to
data that is quantifiable. know also is an effect. As Edward Crawford and Daniel Ghormley
(ii) Rationality- a thought process based on clear and coherent observe, “Man did not will to have a will. Yet, the will is essential to
ideas that follow through from commonly accepted rules of man’s existence. Neither is man a rational being because he has
logic. either chosen or caused himself to be so. He might choose to suppress
what he knows (or rationally discerns) and thus to act irrationally,
The modernist‘s epistemology also holds the following three core but this would. be a deliberate and contradictory act of his will.”3
assumptions:
The process of knowing involves at least two perceivable entities:
(i) Reductionism – a process whereby a complex phenomenon a knower (to coin a word) and a thing that is known. Without the
can be understood by reducing it to its smallest and most conscious and distinct individuality of a knower, nothing is knowable.
fundamental parts. Once these parts are objectively Without this conscious and distinct individuality no one could be a
established, the understanding of the whole can be ascertained. knower. Therefore the knower component always presupposes the
(ii) Linear causality- the cause and effect in a phenomenon adequate Cause of man’s self-conscious/rational faculty and is the,
investigated is assumed to behave in a linear relationship the first of the necessary entity. In short we can conclude that together
(iii) Neutral objectivity- the epistemic process that employs with the knower and the thing that is known the reason a posteriori
empiricism and rationality would discover a real and objective is part of the epistemology.
world that is neutral and independent of the knower/observer.2 Scholars have already pointed out that three concepts are
The postmodernist criticism is leveled against the modernist‘s necessary to biblical epistemology and therefore necessary to all
empiricism, rationality and all its assumptions as follows: biblical apologetics:

104 105
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
1. The natural man possesses valid and actual knowledge (Rm man knows and appreciates irrespective of any particular language
1:18-21; 2 Co 4:2 ). what the natural man does perceive or any utterance of spoken words.5 Spoken words are only names
(clearly understand) concerning God he perceives rationally for (or labels assigned to) rational observations, assessments, and
(a posteriori) because, as the Apostle affirms, he understands conclusions. Written words are but symbols used to represent
these things by means of the things that are made. spoken words. While such labels may be employed as aids to
2. There is reason a posteriori (from effect back to adequate organize rational thoughts and ideas, they themselves are not rational
cause) in every human being to arrive at valid conclusions thoughts. They are only labels. The wordless language of knowing
about his own self-conscious and cognitive faculty. Man is no is that process of synthesis and recognition which involves not only
more the author of the ideas of hearing and seeing than he is man’s reasoning from the effects to their adequate cause, but man’s
the author of his senses of justice and just retribution. He is assessment and appreciation of interrelationship, order, design, and
neither the author of the will to acquire knowledge nor of his purpose in the things that he perceives.6
faculty of cognition. He always knows from a posteriori. At least the following epistemological claims are either stated,
3. Human beings do perceive actual knowledge about God. As implied, or presupposed in the Bible:
St. Paul’s language affirms (Rm 1:18-21) there may be many 1. God is a knower and God’s knowledge includes ‘propositional’
liars and suppressors of the knowledge of God, but there are knowledge. (Gen 3:5; Luke 16:15; 1 Cor. 3:20)
no atheists. Two deductions are valid: (i) that God cannot 2. God created all other knowers. (Gen. 1:1; Rev. 4:11)
contradict Himself; and (ii) that God must condemn all 3. We can obtain knowledge of God. (Jer. 31:34; John 14:7)
imperfection, For these reasons, the natural man suppresses 4. In fact, everyone has knowledge of God in a limited sense,
his knowledge of God. even though that knowledge may be suppressed. (Rom. 1:18-
These epistemological principles are not based on any 23)
autonomous virtue or innate powers of human beings: on the contrary, 5. Knowledge of God is one of the most important goals of human
man is entirely a caused and therefore a contingent being. God is the life. (Jer. 31:34; John 17:3; Acts 17:24)
source and the sustainer: “In Him we live and move and have our 6. What a person can know about God, and about other closely
being” (Acts 17:28). related matters, depends in large measure on their spiritual
Bible and Epistemology state. (Ps. 82:5; Luke 10:21; Rom. 1:21; 1 Cor. 2:11-
There is a connection between man’s rational perception of God 16; Eph. 4:17-18)
and the written revelation of God. The connection is this: the Bible 7. Our knowledge of God is necessarily limited. (Job 36:26; Isa.
also is an effect. It is an effect which both testifies and also declares 55:8-9; Rom. 11:33)
its own adequate Cause.4 It is certainly true that the Bible does not 8. God’s Word is a higher epistemic authority than human reason
set forth an epistemology in the traditional sense. It doesn’t seek to or intuition. (Prov. 3:5; Isa. 8:20; Jer. 23:29; John 10:35; 1
address questions like, “What are the necessary and sufficient Cor. 1:25; 2 Tim. 3:16-17; 1 Pet. 1:23-25)
conditions for knowing?” The language of knowing in the mind of 9. One can know with a high degree of confidence that the
man is without the spoken words of language, it is the silent, universal message of the gospel is true. (Luke 1:4; Acts 2:36; Acts
language of rational perceptions and synthesis of ideas. It is what 17:31)

106 107
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
10. People of all levels of intellectual sophistication can have a 24. There is substantial continuity between divine reasoning and
saving knowledge of God and Jesus Christ. (Deut. 29:29; Luke human reasoning. (Isa. 1:18)
10:21; 1 Cor. 1:26-28) 25. It is possible and worthwhile for believers to reason with
11. There are objective truths: truths that are independent of human unbelievers about God, Jesus Christ, etc. (Acts 17:2; 17:16-
opinions and feelings. (Exod. 20:16; Prov. 12:17; John 34; 18:4; 18:19; 19:8-9)
8:44; 17:17; 19:35; Gal. 2:14; 2 Cor. 10:5) Epistemological Foundations for a Biblical Theology
12. There are culture-transcending truths that can be known by
people from all cultures; not all knowledge is culture-relative. Cristopher Cone delineates four foundations of Biblical
(Ezek. 38:23; 39:7; John 17:23; Acts 11:20; 19:10; 20:21; epistemology.7 The first epistemological statement in the Bible,
Rom. 15:8-13; 16:26) according to Cone, is actually made by the serpent in the Garden:
“For God knows that in the day you eat from it your eyes will be
13. There is a significant ethical dimension to human belief and opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil” (Gen
knowledge. (Prov. 1:7; Matt. 22:36-38; Rom. 1:18-32; 1 Cor. 3:5). Satan prescribes knowledge through contradicting God’s
10:31) design for knowledge. Cone rightly observes that “The fact that
14. One can be morally culpable for failing to hold certain beliefs. Satan chose epistemology as an early battleground underscores the
(John 16:9; 2 Thess. 2:12; Heb. 3:19; 1 John 5:10) strategic significance of epistemology in God’s design.” While the
15. It is possible to know some truths via sense experience. (Gen. actions Satan prescribed did result in particular knowledge (Gen
46:30; Luke 21:20, 30; John 3:11; 19:35) 3:22), it was a distortion of God’s design for knowledge and resulted
16. It is possible to know some truths apart from sense experience. in tragedy and not blessing.
(Matt. 16:16-17; Luke 5:22) The epistemological thought reaches its climactic point in the book
17. It is possible to know some truths by direct divine revelation, of Proverbs as Solomon identifies: “The fear of the Lord is the
apart from natural means. (Gen. 46:2-4; Ezek. 1:1; Dan. beginning of wisdom” (Prov 1:7); “The fear of the Lord is the
7:1; Matt. 16:16-17; Rev. 1:9-11) beginning of wisdom, and the knowledge of the Holy One is
18. It is possible to know moral truths. (Isa. 51:7; Rom. 7:1) understanding” (Prov 9:10); and again, “The fear of the Lord is the
19. It is possible to know future contingents. (Matt. 20:17- instruction for wisdom” (Prov 15:33). The word for fear is the
19; Mark 13:22-23; Luke 22:34; John 6:64) Hebrew yirah, and does not simply denote respect, but is the term
normally used of fear - as in fear for one’s life. Again, notice the
20. Inductive knowledge based on sense experience is critique of the atheist in Ps 14:1: “The fool has said in
commonplace. (Matt. 16:1-3; 24:32) his heart (Heb., leb) ‘There is no God.’” The fool is unresponsive
21. Human testimony is an important source of knowledge. toward God, and sets his will against God, whereas the one who
(Numbers 35:30; Luke 1:2; John 21:24) would possess wisdom acknowledges God and is responsive to
22. At least some human knowledge is not dependent on human Him.
embodiment. (Luke 16:25; 23:42-43; Rev. 6:9-11) The Book of Job is left with an important choice, to choose
23. Arguments a fortiori are a good form of reasoning. (Luke between mutually exclusive first principles: rationalism, naturalistic
11:13; 12:24; Rom. 11:12) empiricism, existentialism, or Biblical pre-suppositionalism. Cone
points out four pillars of Biblical epistemology:
108 109
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
1. The first is the existence of the Biblical God. As first principal, finite vocabularies and grammatical concepts. These two principles
the God of the Bible exists, and not merely as one god among many, demand two corresponding hermeneutic principles: (1) that we
but as the One who has disclosed Himself in such a way that His understand the meaning of the text in the normal sense of these
exclusivity is unavoidable. The Biblical God is characterized above languages (i.e., the literal grammatical-historical hermeneutic), and
all else by holiness (Is 6:3; Rev 4:8), and all that He does is to be (2) that we are hermeneutically consistent in deference to the authority
understood through that lens. The recognition of this first principle of the text, and in recognition that it is the Revealer who is enthroned
does not advocate faith as the sole or final source of understanding and not the interpreter.
truth; rather it is an invitation to step into the Biblical perspective, to Hermeneutics as Epistemology
“taste and see that the Lord is good” (Ps 34:8).
In what follows we will analyse the important arguments of the
2. God has divinely and authoritatively disclosed Himself for the leading theological epistemologists, such as Emilio Betti, Hans-Georg
purpose of His own glorification, through general revelation, i.e., Gadamer and Paul Ricoeur.
creation (Rom 1:18-20), personal revelation, i.e., Jesus Christ (Jn
1:1-18) and special revelation, i.e., the Sacred Scripture (2 Tim Betti tries to overcome subjectivist interpretation by stressing the
3:16-17). General revelation renders every man without excuse, autonomous meaning of the text - apart from its subjective meaning
providing an inescapable awareness of God. But general revelation for the interpreter. To carry out this project, he proposes four canons
is intentionally incomplete and ineffective for providing regenerative of interpretation:8 (i) The canon of the autonomy of the object of
grace - special and personal revelation is needed for that. In special interpretation. It means the original author’s intention is determinative
revelation God chose human language as the vehicle for His self- of the meaning of the text. The inspired sacred author and his sitz
disclosure. im Leben are important in the understanding of the text. (ii) The
canon of totality which requires the interpreter to read sections of a
3. The incapacity of natural man to comprehend (receive) God’s text in light of the whole. This principle is similar to the principle of
revelation. Of course, humanity can cognitively understand and integrity as envisioned in Dei Verbum.9 (iii) The canon of actualized
experientially interact with general and special revelation, and is understanding. It means that the interpreter’s task is to reconstruct
enlightened further in Christ’s incarnation (Jn 1:9), but just as natural within himself or herself and to retranslate the extraneous thought of
man rejects that which we know about God through creation (Rom an Other into the actuality of one’s own life. It means that the text
1:18-20), and just as natural man fails to receive the spiritual truths should transform the reader to horizons of faith of the reader and
of the word (1 Cor 2:14), natural man likewise rejects God’s the interpreter. (iv) The canon of harmonization of understanding
revelation in the Person of Christ (Jn 3:19). This is not just Bob’s which argues that only a mind of equal stature and congenial
problem, it is yours and mine as well: without some type of additional disposition can understand another mind in a meaningfully adequate
divine aid, humanity consistently fails to receive that which God has way. This leads to the importance of the church where congenial
revealed. Divine enablement is needed and has to be provided, disposition of understanding is getting harmonized.
according to His own will, for overcoming the deficiencies of humanity
inherited through sin. For Gadamer, the primary task of philosophical reflection on
hermeneutics is not to develop a method of interpretation or
4. A consistently applied hermeneutic is necessary for knowing understanding, but ‘to clarify the (ontological) conditions in which
God. Scripture claims God-breathed authority and has been revealed understanding takes place.10 Gadamer is of the opinion that the key
in particular through known human languages that are composed of is to see that all acts of interpretation and understanding take place
110 111
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
within a polarity of familiarity and strangeness - a tension between self referential system that has no center or stable structure. What
that which is preunderstood and that which is being presented for this means is that there appears to be no fixed meaning in the text
understanding.11 The primary task of interpretation is to let the text and if there is, it is indeterminate. Instead, according to the
interpret us before we interpret it. The interpreter helps the reader postmodernist, we have a variety of meanings none of which have
for the ‘fusion of horizons,’ i.e., the horizons of pre-understnding primacy over the rest.
and present understanding. Gadamer raises serious questions about 3. Neutral objectivity is another characteristic of modernist
the legitimacy of making the intention of the author the standard for epistemology. The epistemic process that employs empiricism and
the meaning of a text. He believes this creation of a growing tradition rationality would discover a real and objective world that is neutral
of meaning is a positive characteristic that should be exploited. and independent of the knower/observer. On the contrary, the post-
Paul Ricoeur agreeing with Gadamar argues that the text must be modern epistemology argues that realities are based on merely human
interpreted and allowed to judge and correct the preunderstandings constructs, temporary hypotheses that change with time, and are
of the interpreter. However, he differs from Gadamer in the way he pluralistic. No one can claim his/her hypothesis is correct as all are
‘distances’ the text from the interpreter’s self-understanding.12 equally valid.
Post Modern Epistemology Deconstructionism is another important aspect of post-modern
Postmodernism, unlike modernism that is rooted in history, rejects epistemology. According to the deconstructionist view, it is a mistake
the dominance of history. For the postmodern man there is no past to view the reality of God through the lens of philosophical theology,
and no future, there is only a perpetual and dominant present. Nor commonly known as onto-theology or simply metaphysics. Instead,
are there any foundations, fixed certainties or absolutes. The theology is related to Derrida‘s concept of the linguistic sign. In
modernist epistemology (logical positivism) was founded on the two other words, we could only understand God in terms of a finite
corner stones of empiricism and rationalism. Hock Siew Lee contrasts model, and the model is human language. As a result, the following
the following characteristics of modern and post modern characteristics and drawbacks become obvious in the post-modern
epistemology:13 epistemology.14

1. Reductionism is a characteristic of modern epistemology. It is 1. Demise of the author- It is impossible to recover the intentions
a process whereby a complex phenomenon can be understood by of the author because of our pre-understanding and the unstable
reducing it to its smallest and most fundamental parts. Against this nature of the text. Postmodernism claims that the author‘s intention
view the post-modern epistemology argues that the knower and the cannot be recovered and hence the meaning of the text as defined
known are not independent of each other, because the knower brings by the author is irrelevant. The notion that the author created the
with her/him pre-understanding to the known. textual meaning is a repressive social construct and hence must be
ignored so that the text is free from bias.
2. Modernists believe in linear causality according to which the
cause and effect in a phenomenon investigated is assumed to behave 2. Freeing the text- Instead of viewing the text as author-intended
in a linear relationship. However, post modernists argue that rather written communication, the text is regarded as free of constraints
than there being an independent cause preceding an effect, cause and objective content. Thus the text is open to any form of
and effect mutually shape each other. It is therefore impossible to interpretations. The text is not as arbitrary as the postmodernist would
distinguish between them. Postmodernism claims that language is a want us to believe. The meaning is fixed not by human convention
but by our cognitive experience of the external world. A good example
112 113
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
is the effects of gravity. There is no pluralistic interpretation to the perspective. Exegesis focuses on understanding the text in its own
effects of gravity when one walks out of a tall building. horizon, the humanities are used to help understand the horizon of
3. Privileging the reader - It is considered that textual meaning the interpreter, and systematics is concerned with the process of
originates not from the author but the reader. In typical radical reader fusing these two horizons. Significant help in making this fusion would
response criticism, the meaning of the text is almost entirely the product be derived from the history of such fusions found in Christian
of the individual reader. Meaning, like beauty, is in the eyes of the tradition.17
beholder. The reader‘s task is to recover the meaning of the author
and not impose his/her own understanding into the text. While we Endnotes
accept that 131 the reader‘s pre-understanding may influence the
reading initially, the hermeneutics could be carried out in a controlled 1 For a detailed survey see, Hock Siew Lee, Christianity And The
Postmodern Turn A Critique Of Postmodern Epistemology (The South
manner. The interaction between the reader and the text is an iterative African Theological Seminary: SATSP, 2009).
process, it is like a spiral, where each successive reading gets us 2 R. Jones, Reductionism (London: Associated University Press, 2000)
closer to the author‘s message. 46-47.
3 Edward Crawford and Daniel Ghormley, “Biblical Epistemology,” WRS
Kevin Vanhoozer has claimed that exegesis is the soul of theology Journal 6/2 (1999) 16-23, 17.
and that he evaluates a theological system or worldview by examining 4 Crawford and Ghormley, “Biblical Epistemology,” 20.
how that system affects the process of biblical interpretation. There 5 See R.S. Firestone, “The Epistemological Double Standard Inherent in
are a number of hermeneutical issues raised by postmodernism which Christian Metaphysical Beliefs,” Open Journal of Philosophy 4 (2014),
include the following impacts of epistemology.15 265-280, 266.
6 Crawford and Ghormley, “Biblical Epistemology,” 20.
Conclusion: Impact of Epistemology 7 Cristopher Cone, “Epistemological Foundations for a Biblical Theology,”
1. Biblical epistemology helps in discerning the significance of Presented to the Chafer Theological Seminary Conference, March 12,
2014. (www.drcone.com).
the traditional hermeneutical methodologies from a renewed and
8 See Emilio Betti, Allgemeine Auslegungslehre als Methodik der
dynamic perspective. The value of the historical-critical method is Geistenswissenschaften (Tubingen: J. C. B. Mohr, I967).
that it provides one way of helping the text stand over against the 9 DV 12.
interpreter and speak in its own voice from its own context. 10 Hans-Georg Gadamer, Truth and Method, Philosophical Hermeneutics
(Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, I976);
2. The interconnectedness of Scripture and tradition will be
11 Randy, “Hermeneutic Philosophy,” 523.
explained more vividly from an epistemological perspective. For
12 Paul Ricoeur, Interpretation Theory (Fort Worth, TX: Texas Christian
instance, as Gadamer had pointed out, the text must be allowed to University Press, 1976).
speak in its own right and that the text remains the standard of 13 Hock Siew Lee, Christianity and The Postmodern Turn: Critique of
authentic understanding. Yet, he denies the exclusive authority of the Postmodern Epistemology (South African Theological Seminary, 2009)
‘original’ meaning of the text. Instead, he argues that the true meaning 194.
of the text must be found in the tradition of interpretations it has 14 Lee, Christianity and The Postmodern Turn, 198.
spawned.16 15 K. Vanhoozer, Cambridge Companion to Postmodern Theology
(Cambridge :CUP, 2005), 188.
3. The fusion of horizons of exegesis, systematics and the 16 Randy, “Hermeneutic,” 527.
humanities would effectively take place in the epistemological 17 Randy, “Hermeneutic,” 529.

114 115
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
nature. Therefore every creature is a word of God, and has a
supernatural destiny.
It is expedient to excavate Trent’s teaching on tradition and the
development of Catholic theories of tradition between Trent and
Chapter 10 Vatican II. Tan Tran observes that facing the Protestant principle of
sola scriptura, the bishops of Trent claimed that scripture should
not be considered sufficient as the only legitimate source of doctrine.
Although scripture contains all truth of faith and morality, one cannot
understand the message of salvation without reliance on tradition,
Tradition as enshrined in the works of the church’s fathers and in the ecclesiastical
Understood by Dei Verbum doctrines. The bishops held that the authority of tradition is not less
than that of scripture.1 Both scripture and tradition come from God.
Therefore, they must be received with equal reverence. In order to
explain the relation between scripture and tradition, the bishops were
inclined to claim that divine revelation was contained partim (partly)
in written books and partim (partly) in unwritten tradition.
Nevertheless, for reasons that were not entirely clear from the acts

T radition is a divine means intended by God for

the effective and dynamic transmission of
revelation. By the great mission (Mt 28:20)
Christ inaugurated the phase of tradition. Tradition does
of the Council, the terms partim … partim were replaced by the
conjunction et (and) in the final text of Trent’s first decree.
After Trent in the period of Catholic Reform, the relation between
not add or negate anything to the Christ event. There scripture and tradition is often interpreted as though divine revelation
will be no new revelation besides Christ. There could is passed on partly in the canonical scriptures, and partly in the
be more perfect understanding of it. As done by the apostolic tradition. Accordingly, tradition is described as one source
apostles the Church is proclaiming the salvific acts of of the apostolic doctrines, which is not attested by the canonical
Jesus. Three factors are noteworthy in the study of scriptures considered as the other source. The two source theory of
traditions: revelation considers tradition as constant, static, and there is little
vThe apostles before writing down the Revelation, place for the development of tradition. We find this interpretation of
preached the revelation through words, tradition in the writings of Jesuit controversialists such as Peter
institutions, rites and cultic celebrations. Canisius, Edmund Campion, Antonio Possevino, and Robert
Bellarmine. Also this view finds its way into Pius XII’s encyclical
vThe tradition originated even before the written
Humani Generis (1950), in which the Pope addressed such questions
Scripture.
as evolution, revelation, theological method, and existentialism. Again
vThe written word is the inspired codification of the same theory of tradition appears in De Fontibus, the draft of A
tradition. Dogmatic Constitution on the Sources of Revelation, which was
Revelation begins at creation, where God who prepared by the Doctrinal Commission between 1960 and 1962.
generated the Word of God in all eternity, creates the
116 117
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
Along with the two source theory of revelation that considers and practice, but also develops the explicit content of faith. G.
tradition as one source of the development of doctrine, Yves Congar Perrone (1794 – 1876) and J. B. Franzelin (1816 – 1886) were the
points out four dominant theories of tradition that existed in the leading names of this school that promoted the theology of
nineteenth century.2 In fact these theories played a vital role at the magisterium.6 The doctrines such as the Immaculate Conception
backdrop of the evolution of understanding of tradition in Dei and the Assumption of Mary, and the infallibility of the pope have
Verbum. their foundation in the magisterium that constitutes the highest authority
Of the four approaches the first is the German approach headed of the church on matters of faith and morals. Franzelin himself
by the Catholic School of Tübingen who conceived tradition as a distinguishes between “active tradition” and “objective tradition.” In
living subject. The unitive dimension of the idea of tradition and its objective sense, tradition is made up of the deposit of doctrines
scripture is emphasized in this approach. Johann Möhler (1796 – and ecclesiastical institutions, which have been handed on from the
1838), one of the leading members of the school, criticizes the idea beginning of Christianity.
that divine revelation is handed on partly in the canonical scriptures, The fourth understanding of tradition is developed by John Henry
and partly in the oral traditions.3 Accordingly, he understands tradition Newman (1801 – 1890) who distinguished between the prophetic
as a collective sense of the faith that the Spirit of Christ grants to the tradition and the apostolic tradition.7 According to Newman, the
church. The same Spirit is dynamically active both in the tradition latter is continuous, invariant, and infallible, while the former is an
and the scripture. ongoing and unofficial commentary of the latter. In other words, the
The second notion is developed by the French philosopher, prophetic tradition mediates the apostolic tradition to believers,
Maurice Blondel (1861 – 1949), who conceives action as one source proposing new expressions to understand, articulate, and faithfully
of development of knowledge. Applying this theory to the theology present the apostolic faith. Nevertheless, the prophetic tradition adds
of tradition, Blondel claims that tradition transmits a “tacit” component nothing substantial to the apostolic tradition. When Newman became
of faith, that is, the aspect of faith that cannot be spelled out in verbal a Catholic, he abandons the above distinction, arguing that the
statements.4 Blondel opposes both extrinsicism and historicism scriptures never exist alone without the interpretation of ecclesial
regarding the church’s dogmas. While extrinsicism considers dogma authority. Because the church’s teaching offices alone could define
as purely speculative statements and excludes the contribution of new doctrines, the apostolic tradition is not constant and immutable
historical facts in the process of forming the church’s dogmas, as Vincent of Lerins maintains: Quod ubique, quod semper, quod
historicism reduces the spiritual reality of faith to the written documents ab omnibus, that is, “what has been believed everywhere, always,
alone.5 Blondel holds that tradition sustains in the community of and by everyone.” According to Newman, the actual tradition
believers a vital sense of the divine realities to which Christians are develops through a harmonious interaction between the ecclesiastical
committed in faith through actions. The primary vehicle of tradition magisterium and the sense of the faithful. Although the hierarchical
is not words, but believers’ faithful actions, including the liturgy of magisterium and the faithful conserve and hand on the apostolic
the church. tradition, the magisterium alone can judge and define a truth of faith
that becomes a church’s dogma or a law of the church.
The third notion of tradition is developed in Italy by the Jesuit
Roman School who emphasized the role of the magisterium as the Among the four views of tradition the Tubingen view is mostly
principal agent that makes known to the faithful the canon of faith. reflected in the theological exposition of tradition in Dei Verbum.
The magisterium not only safeguards the apostolic faith, teaching, Joseph Ratzinger (later Pope Benedict XVI) explains this influence
while commenting on the theology of Second Vatican Council as he
118 119
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
states: “It is not difficult … to recognize the pen of Yves Congar in faithful, guiding them to all truth, uniting them in ministry, constantly
the text, and to see behind it the influence of the Catholic School of renewing the church, and leading the church to a perfect union with
Tübingen of the nineteenth century with, in particular, its dynamic Christ in the eschaton” (LG, 4).
and organic idea of tradition, which in turn was strongly impregnated 2. The original truth of faith develops in insight into the words
by the spirit of German Romanticism.”8 Lieven Boeve succinctly and realities through the reflection and study of believers together
summarises the view of Ratzinger on the notion tradition as envisioned with the intimate sense of the spiritual realities that they experience.
in Dei Verbum: “Ratzinger confirms that the dynamics of this new The development of tradition is thus “not seen simply as a function
view on tradition stem from (a) the acknowledgement of the tension of the hierarchy, but is anchored in the whole life of the Church.”11
between ‘what is expressed’ and ‘what remains unexpressed’ in In this process of understanding, the work of the church’s teaching
revelation, (b) the all-encompassing character of tradition (referring office is considered as one of the primary components of the
to the teaching, life and worship of the ecclesial community), and (c) development of tradition, but it should not be considered as the
the recognition that tradition develops over time, not only through whole.12
its proclamation by the magisterium but also ‘through contemplation
and study by believers, who “ponder these thing in their hearts” 3. Against the arguments of Ernesto Ruffini and Paul- Émile Léger,
(DV 8).9 the two leading bishops theologians on the council floor, the document
Dei Verbum argued that the apostolic tradition does develop “in
The idea of tradition in DV could be understood in the light the insight into the realities and words that are being passed on.”13 Ruffini
theology of tradition suggested by Congar who had suggested three and Léger were of the opinion that the apostolic tradition comes to
interrelated aspects of meaning regarding the concept of “tradition:” a dead end by the death of the last apostle. Consequently, the
(1) the transmission of the whole Gospel, that is, the whole Christian apostolic tradition remains unchanged with the unchangeable Word
mystery manifested in the scriptures, the confessions of faith, and of God. Rejecting this view, the document radically held the stance
the sacraments together with the realities that they convey; (2) the of the development of tradition by claiming that the apostolic tradition
interpretations or the meanings given to the realities transmitted within develops in insight into the realties and worlds through the church’s
a community of believers; and (3) “the interpretation or reading of understanding of the mystery of faith given at the beginning. Although
Scripture that was developed and expressed in a whole series of the document keeps silence on the how of the development of
fixed testimonies, whether in writings or monuments: institutions, tradition, it is important to observe that the document ends up the
liturgy, art, customs, etc.”10 The following are the salient features of discussion as an open reality leaving ample room to build up for the
tradition as envisioned in Dei verbum. later generations of theologians.
1. Dei Verbum attributes the source as well as the preservation 4. Tradition is essentially connected to the life of the Church.
of the tradition to the dynamism of the Holy Spirit who is the soul According to Dei Verbum tradition as a living organism which through
and life of the Church. The document claims that under the guidance “practices” adapts itself to its environments and contextual changes,
of the Spirit, the apostolic tradition develops in accordance with in order to pass on its contents from one generation to another.
three ways. It develops through the contemplation and study of Tradition shapes beliefs, behaviors, and attitudes of those who
believers, through the spiritual experiences of faith that they encounter, participate in the “practices” of tradition. Baptist theologian James
and through the teachings of bishops, who have received the sure McClendon’s concept of social practice sheds light on and is suitable
charism of truth. This idea of tradition is reflected in Lumen Gentium to explain the idea of tradition: According to McClendon, “a
as well: “Holy Spirit dwells in the church and in the hearts of the
120 121
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
‘practice’ … is a complex series of human actions involving definite apostolicity, and the scriptures.17 Dei Verbum is of the opinion that
practitioners, who by these means and in accordance with these the church’s teaching office should be considered as an authoritative
rules together seek the understood end.”14 McClendon’s rule to judge whether a development within the tradition is authentic,
understanding of a true practice consists of four components: (1) catholic, and apostolic.
practitioners who participate in the practices are well aware of their 7. The Witnesses of tradition are the Fathers of the Church who
participation; (2) practitioners employ determinate means to obtain authentically interpreted the text and the liturgy that makes present
their ends; (3) they proceed according to the rules of grammar; (4) all the salvation history of revelation in rituals. Both are means of
they strive for some ends beyond the means themselves. It means communicating the revelation, Both scripture and tradition are inspired
that within a religious tradition, a shared vision is the end towards by the Holy Spirit, Integrity of revelation is in Scripture and Tradition.
which a community of believers orientates its practices. Again by
engaging in a set of practices, one develops certain attitudes, 8. The correlation between continuity and development of tradition
dispositions, and postures appropriate for persons involved in a must be properly understood to grasp the meaning tradition
tradition. Eventually, by learning “the rules of grammar” that govern envisioned in Dei Verbum. According to Congar, the development
the practices, one comes to know how means and ends are of tradition may simply be the unfolding of an idea already present in
connected in these patterns of practices. the scriptures. It may also be the development of the latent qualities
of an idea accepted in the apostolic tradition.18 For example, the
5. The concept of tradition envisioned in Dei Verbum is akin to dogma of the Son being “consubstantial” with the Father simply
the idea of grammar conceived by Ludwig Wittgenstein.15 Grammar clarifies an idea already contained in the Gospel of John, that is, the
is not abstract concepts or standards according to which some acts Johannine Jesus claims that the Father is in him and he is in the
may be judged as right or wrong. Grammar, for Wittgenstein, is Father (14:10-11). The same is true for the dogma of the Real
situated within regular activities which themselves not only entail the Presence of Christ in the Eucharist, for which the term
rules of grammar, but also show the essence of an object. “transubstantiation” has been highly relevant. However, the dogma
Accordingly, the rules of grammar are not technical instructions from of the Immaculate Conception and that of the Assumption of Mary
on high for the correct usage of language, or the norms for meaningful do not appear to be the unfolding of an idea implicit in the scriptures
language. An enormous number of human activities are seen as and the apostolic tradition. Regarding the Marian dogmas, Congar
instances of the rules of grammar. They include the acts of imitating understands the development of tradition as the communication from
the gestures and sounds which others make, converting marks into one living person to another. In the process of communication, the
noises when one is reading music, chanting the number sounds in living subjects necessarily put something of themselves into what
sequence, and so on. The same process is taking place in the they receive. This communication takes place in the history of
transmission of faith through tradition. “Just as grammars are the salvation.
guidelines for those who want to study a language, rules are the
guidelines for those who want to participate in a set of practices 9. Karl Rahner, interpreting Dei Verbum, views tradition as a
within a tradition.”16 process of handing on the faith. It is the transmission of believers’
experience expressed in written documents and practices from one
6. As Gerald O’Collins’s explains the authoritative rules to community to another.19 The community’s experience rests on the
interpret the Catholic tradition is suggested in Dei Verbum. According experience of the apostles and develops their heritage of faith, which
to O’Collins the authoritative rules are the magisterium, the canon, has a historical root and cannot continue to develop if it separates
the sense of faith, the continuity of tradition, the Creed, the
122 123
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
from the connection with the apostles. The apostles themselves
experienced the life and work of Jesus, whom they saw with their 11 Ratzinger, Commentary on the Documents of Vatican II, 186.
eyes and touched with their hands. As the objective content of the 12 Tran, The Development of Tradition, 17.
apostles’ experience, the life and work of Jesus were simpler, yet 13 Dei Verbum, 8.
richer than any individual statement coined by the apostles and those 14 James Wm. McClendon Jr., Systematic Theology, vol. 2 (Nashville:
who associated with them to express this original experience. Abingdon Press, 1994), 28.
The continuity of tradition involves the development of new 15 Ludwig Wittgenstein, Philosophical Investigations, edited by G. M.
articulations of faith that comes from the whole church’s ongoing Anscombe (Oxford: Blackwell, 1953), §373.
experience and reflection on the church’s dogmas and the scriptures. 16 Tran, The Development of Tradition, 26.
This development can be understood as the result of the synthesis 17 Gerald O’Collins, “Criteria for Interpreting the Traditions,” in Problems
and Perspectives of Fundamental Theology, edited by Rene Latourelle
between the historical transmission of written documents and the and Gerald O’Collins (New York: Paulist Press, 1982) 327-339.
present experience of believers, who keep faithfully the words of
18 Congar, The Meaning of Tradition, 112.
God and transmit them creatively into another generation.
19 Karl Rahner, “Consideration on the Development of Dogma,”in
Theological Investigation IV, translated by Kevin Smyth (London:
Darton, Longman & Todd, 1966), 24.

Endnotes
1 Tan Tran, The Development of Tradition: Dei Verbum and a Scientific
Practical Theology of Tradition (Boston: Boston University, 2012, 12.
2 Yves Congar, Tradition and Traditions: A Historical and Theological
Essay, translated by M. Naseby and T. Rainborough (New York:
Macmillan, 1967), 189-221.
3 Johann Möhler, Unity in the Church, edited and translated by Peter C.
Erb (Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America Press, 1996).
4 Maurice Blondel, The Letter on Apologetics, and History and Dogma,
presented and translated by Alexander Dru and I. Trethowan (New
York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1965).
5 Tran, The Development of Tradition, 14.
6 For details see James P. Mackey, The Modern Theology of Tradition
(New York: Herder and Herder, 1963).
7 See Gunter Biemer, Newman on Tradition (London: Burns & Oates,
1967).
8 Ratzinger, Commentary on the Documents of Vatican II, 184.
9 Boeve, “Revelation, Scripture and Tradition,” 425.
10 Congar, Tradition and Traditions, 287-288.

124 125
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
God with others (section 3: Verbum Mundo). The Pope Clearly
states, “We must never forget that all authentic and living Christian
spirituality is based on the word of God proclaimed, accepted,
celebrated and meditated upon in the Church. This deepening
Chapter 11 relationship with the divine word will take place with even greater
enthusiasm if we are conscious that, in Scripture and the Church’s
living Tradition, we stand before God’s definitive word on the cosmos
and on history” (VD 142).
1. Word is the raison d’etre
Audio, Ergo Sum Undoubtedly, proclaiming the Gospel is the raison d’etre of the
Living the Word in Church and her mission. Like the People of Israel, Church should
Worship as Envisioned in Verbum Domini continue to say: “All that the Lord has spoken we will do, and
we will be obedient” (Ex 24:7). Mission of the Church is to
proclaim the kingdom of God, which is the Person of Jesus himself
who offers salvation to everyone through his words and deeds. A
bold, shared testimony of a life lived according to the Word of God,
as seen in the life of Jesus, is a prerequisite in being faithful to the
mission of the Church.1 Bringing the Word of God to people is an

I
t is often said that Pope Benedict XVI was the
first biblical theologian to sit in the Chair of St. important mission which implies a deep conviction of sentire cum
Peter. Verbum Domini is comparatively a large Ecclesia (to think with the Church).
work consisting of some 41,000 words and 382
One of the first requirements for an effective Gospel proclamation
footnotes, making it an admittedly daunting document
is trust in the transforming power of the Word in the heart of the one
for many readers. Though Pope John Paul II had
who hears. Indeed, ”the word of God is living and active ...
written voluminously on various topics during his long
discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart” (Heb 4:12).
pontificate, no specific encyclical or apostolic
A second requirement, particularly noticed and credible today, is to
exhortation was written on Bible, whereas Pope
proclaim the Word of God as the source of conversion, justice,
Benedict had published extensively on this topic
hope, fellowship and peace. Other requirements are boldness,
including his celebrated gospel commentary “Jesus of
courage, the spirit of poverty, humility, coherence, and the friendliness
Nazreth.”
of the one who serves the Word of God.
The document Verbum Domini is divided into three
main sections, examining the theological understanding
2. The Trinity of Word Sacrament and the Church
of how God speaks (section 1: Verbum Dei), the The NT writers were struggling to present the continuity between
celebration of God’s word in the liturgy, prayer and the incarnated logos and the abiding presence of the eternal logos in
life of the Church (section 2: Verbum in Ecclesia), the Church. The misconceptions brought forth in the resurrection
and the Christian responsibility to share the word of narratives of the gospels sheds light on the narrative tension of the

126 127
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
evangelist in highlighting this continuity. There are at least three obvious
misconceptions in the resurrection accounts: This process of the shift from the incarnated logos to the eternal
§Mary Magdalelene misunderstanding risen Jesus to the Gardner logos is made obvious in the gospels through three important aspects:
(Jn 20:11) the word, sacrament and the Church.
§The Two Disciples on the Way to Emmaus misunderstood the The trinity of the word, sacrament and the Church are revealed
risen Lord to be a stranger (Lk 24:13-35) obviously in the Emmaeus story. The Gospel of Luke relates that
§The seven disciples at lake Tiberias misunderstood the risen “their eyes were opened and they recognized him” (24:31) only
one as a stranger who had come to buy fish. when Jesus took the bread, said the blessing, broke it and gave it to
them, whereas earlier “their eyes were kept from recognizing him”
These deceptions are neither momentary nor accidental. Invariably (24:16). The presence of Jesus, first with his words and then with
through each event of misconception, the evangelists are trying to the act of breaking bread, made it possible for the disciples to
present before the reader both the continuity as well as the recognize him. Now they were able to appreciate in a new way all
discontinuity between the crucified Jesus and the risen Lord. They that they had previously experienced with him: “Did not our hearts
did not want the readers to conceive the fact of resurrection merely burn within us while he talked to us on the road, while he opened to
as a return of Jesus to life after a long sleep of around 36 hours. The us the Scriptures?” (24:32). The koinonia of the people who share
distance between the crucified and the risen one is the distance this new experience is the Church. Devoid of the living dynamism of
between death and life; heaven and earth, temporality and eternity. the Church Scripture will be subjected to fossilization. “There is a
In other words, in the reality of resurrection the eternal logos who structural problem within Protestantism that is not solved by reiterating
incarnated in the person of Jesus of Nazareth was assuming back to a thousand times that sola scriptura is the hermeneutical principle
his status of eternal logos. of Protestantism. There must be concrete structures within the church
through which the hermeneutical process takes place from day to
§ Mary Magdalelene came to know the risen one when she
day. In Protestantism, the structures have become shadowy, if not
heard Jesus calling her by name. Thus the Word of God
invisible.”2
becomes the first means to recognize the risen Lord (Jn 20:14-
15). 3. Major Emphases of Verbum Domini
§ The Two Disciples at Emmaus understood identity of the VD calls the Church as “the home of the word” (VD 52), where
risen Lord as he broke the bread. The sacraments, especially liturgy is the privileged setting in which God speaks to us in the
the eucharist becomes the second means to realize the risen midst of our lives. The interconnection between the Scripture and
Lord (Lk 24:13-35). the Liturgy is well articulated in the in Sacrosanctum
§ The seven disciples at lake Tiberias recognized the risen one Concilium,”sacred Scripture is of the greatest importance in the
as they saw the net containing 153 fishes out of a miraculous celebration of the liturgy. From it are taken the readings, which are
catch. This net containing all species of fish would symbolize explained in the homily and the psalms that are sung. From Scripture
the Church. By making the Word and the sacraments available the petitions, prayers and liturgical hymns receive their inspiration
to the faithful the Church becomes the perfect means to realise and substance. From Scripture the liturgical actions and signs draw
the eternal logos. their meaning” (SC 24). Both the presence of Christ and the Holy
Spirit and the Father’s love is experienced when Scripture is read in
128 129
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
Church” (SC 7). The document once again emphasizes that a faith- the Hebrew prophet, it came through the ear. The eye sees and
filled understanding of sacred Scripture must always refer back dissects. The ear, on the other hand, hears and obeys. The logic of
to the liturgy, in which the word of God is celebrated as a timely the Hebrew scriptures is the logic of revelation.
and living word.
Eventually Greek “seeing” culture and the Hebrew “hearing”
Differentiating the Aural Hebrew and the Visual Greek culture met each other. Philo a Hellenistic Jew from Alexandrea,
Verbum Domini judiciously delineates between the Hebrew and tried to bridge the gulf between Hebrew and Greek thinking. He
Greek approaches to the Scripture. Judaism is a religion of sound, would use allegory as one such bridge. Allegory was a way of
not sight; of hearing rather than seeing; of the word as against the understanding Scripture that sought deeper meanings behind literal
image. The Hebrews did not develop analytical thinking as the Greeks texts. Philo felt that allegory was the way that the Greek mind, with
did.3 Israel was a nation of prophets, not philosophers. Prophets its thoughts about an ideal realm of reason and logic, and the Hebrew
listen to God. Philosophers envision.4 For the Greek philosopher, mind, with its thoughts of heaven, could connect.
intellectual understanding came through the eye. For the Hebrew The Liturgy of the Synagogue was reflecting the Semitic culture
prophet, it came through the ear. The eye sees and dissects. The of hearing. When Jerusalem was destroyed and the people carried
ear, on the other hand, hears and obeys. The logic of the Hebrew off to Babylon (see 2 Kings 25:8-12), the people could no longer
Scriptures is the logic of revelation. Even the theophanies were worship at the Temple. Instead, they formed local congregations.
vociphanies, because in those theophanies no one had seen the
These “synagogues” (from a Greek word meaning “assemblies”)
God of Israel but only heard him revealing. Rabbi Jonathan Sacks
continued after the people were allowed to return to Jerusalem
explains this reality succinctly in his article explaining the meaning of
the Hebrew verb re’eh.5 The God encountered by Abraham, Isaac (see Ezra 1:1-4) as convenient places of meeting on the Sabbath.
and Jacob, by Moses in the burning bush, and by the Israelites as And this remained true in Jesus’ time. We can see a good picture
they stood at the foot of Mount Sinai, came not as an appearance, of that synagogue liturgy early in Luke’s Gospel, where Jesus is
a visible presence, but as a voice - commanding, promising, invited to read the lesson of the day in the synagogue in Nazareth
challenging, summoning. For the Hebrews hearing was a greater (see Luke 4:16-22). Jesus reads the lesson from Isaiah, then
epistemological category than seeing.6 interprets it in a sermon (see Luke 4:23-27) - just as today we
hear readings and then a sermon interpreting the readings in our
The Greek philosophers were among the first to understand the Liturgy of the Word.
new power of the written word. Plato did not just hear words; he
saw them. He knew words as ideas, detached from life and taking The Patristic Era (Alexandrean and Antiochian Schools): From
on a life of their own. Our word idea comes ultimately from the 100- 400 A.D., the heart of the patristic era, the seeing and hearing
Greek word “to see.” Our word theory comes from the Greek cultures both existed within the church. Those who thought with the
word theoria, meaning ‘a sight’ (of something seen). An idea is a logic of revelation sought to hear God’s Voice in the text, but those
concept you can see in your mind. who thought with the logic tried to analyze the text as well. The
“hearing” culture predominated over the “seeing” culture. When the
Unlike the Greeks, however, the Hebrews did not develop
people read the Bible, they sensed there had to be something more
analytical thinking. Israel was a nation of prophets, not philosophers.
Prophets listen to God. Philosophers envision. For the Greek than just words on paper. They expected to experience the Living
philosopher, intellectual understanding came through the eye. For God in the text.

130 131
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
A difference began to arise in their minds between a “spiritual” Reflection on the performative character of the word of God in
(reading the Bible in such a way as to listen to and experience the the sacramental action leads to the sacramentality of the
Voice of God) and a “literal” (reading of the written words without word. Though Pope John Paul II had made reference to the
having an experience of the Person of God) reading of a text. In “sacramental character of revelation”8 the concept of the
Alexandria, Origen and his followers played freely with allegory, sacramentality of the Word is unique to this document. The
following Philo’s example. Allegorical excesses came to plague sacramentality of the Word is made obvious by means of the following
biblical studies for centuries. Notable exegetes of the time included realities:
Origen of Alexandria, the great allegorist (c. 185-254). In the eastern
Mediterranean there was Diodorus of Tarsus, Theodore of vThe sacramentality of the word of God is the mystery of the
Mopsuestia (c. 350-428) and John Chrysostom (c. 345-407). Incarnation itself, because incarnation is Word became flesh.
Attempts were made at historical criticism during the patristic era. Here we can see a radical shifting from the Hebrew hearing
The exegetes of ancient Antioch, are the champions of a historical- culture to the Greek seeing culture.
grammatical approach in the ancient world.7 The notable exegetes vThe sacramentality of the word can be understood by analogy
of the West are Ambrose (c. 340-397), Jerome (c. 340-420), with the real presence of Christ under the appearances of the
Augustine (354-430) and Gregory the Great (c. 540-604). consecrated bread and wine. The performative act of the
Although the church remained suspicious of philosophy, it does Word has now resulted something as the object of seeing.
not mean that it lacked great minds — individuals like Irenaeus, The mystery of the Eucharist reveals the true manna, the true
Clement, Origen, Athanasius, Ambrose, Augustine and Jerome were bread of heaven: it is God’s Logos made flesh, who gave
all great intellectual leaders. These leaders all shared the belief that himself up for us in the paschal mystery.
the logic of grammar is not the same as the logic of revelation. Their
attitude toward reason, therefore, was one of faith seeking vThe sacramentality of the word demands absolute reverence
understanding. to the Word of God. Saint Jerome speaks of the way we
ought to approach both the Eucharist and the word of God:
4. The Sacramentality of the Word
“We are reading the sacred Scriptures. For me, the Gospel
One of the unique contributions of VD is the affir,ation of the is the Body of Christ; for me, the holy Scriptures are his
sacramentality of the word of God. It does not mean that the synod teaching. And when he says: whoever does not eat my
did not institute the reading of the Word of God as the eighth flesh and drink my blood (Jn 6:53), even though these
sacrament, the relationship between word and sacramental gesture words can also be understood of the [Eucharistic]
is explained as the liturgical expression of God’s activity in the history Mystery, Christ’s body and blood are really the word of
of salvation through the performative character of the word itself.
Scripture, God’s teaching. When we approach the
In salvation history there is no separation between what
[Eucharistic] Mystery, if a crumb falls to the ground we
God says and what he does. The Hebrew term dabar means that
are troubled. Yet when we are listening to the word of
the word accomplishes what it says. The Pope says that “by educating
God, and God’s Word and Christ’s flesh and blood are
the People of God to discover the performative character of God’s
being poured into our ears yet we pay no heed, what
word in the liturgy, we will help them to recognize his activity in
salvation history and in their individual lives” (VD 53). great peril should we not feel?”9

132 133
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
vA deeper understanding of the sacramentality of God’s word attitude of authentic listening: Verbo crescente, verba
can thus lead us to a more unified understanding of the mystery deficient.
of revelation, which takes place through “deeds and words
ØSpecial attention should be given to the ambo (Behma) as the
intimately connected”; an appreciation of this can only benefit
liturgical space from which the word of God is proclaimed:
the spiritual life of the faithful and the Church’s pastoral activity.
the double table of the word and of the Eucharist.
4.1 Suggestions and practical proposals for promoting fuller
participation in the liturgy (65-75) ØThe exclusive use of biblical texts in the liturgy namely
that the readings drawn from sacred Scripture may never
The importance of the homily: The faithful listen to God’s word be replaced by other texts
and meditate on it, but those who have the office of teaching by
virtue of sacred ordination or have been entrusted with exercising ØAs part of the enhancement of the word of God in the liturgy,
that ministry”, namely, bishops, priests and deacons, “expound the attention should also be paid to the use of songs which are of
word of God”. ‘Verbum Dei’, in Greek: ‘Logos Theou’ (The Word clear biblical inspiration and which express, through the
of God) - that is what people seek when they come to Church. harmony of music and words, the beauty of God’s word.
That is what they expect to hear from the mouth of their pastors. ØEmphasizing the centrality of the word of God in the Church’s
Not his jokes, not his anecdotes, not his personal word or opinion life, as a means of letting the Bible inspire all pastoral
about the things that affect their lives. They can find those anywhere work”.
else if they have need of them. It is God’s Word, God’s message,
God’s will, God’s light, God’s meaning they seek. They expect 4.2 ‘Encounter’ with Word and Encounter Jesus
their pastors to be “theologians” to them when they proclaim the A consistent point of emphasis throughout Verbum Domini is
Biblical text. Or they expect their pastor at the very least, to help that Christianity is first and foremost a transforming encounter with
them ‘theo-logize’ - i.e., to help them make sense of human Jesus Christ, and that reading and meditating on the Word of God is
experience in the light of God’s Word, in the light of faith, to empower an essential way in which that encounter takes place. The prologue
them to see their lives from the perspective of God and live them as to John’s Gospel is a guide and touchstone for the entire document:
they should. Our lay faithful come to Church for fire, for some divine “The prologue of John’s Gospel leads us to ponder the fact that
light and warmth that can give life to their otherwise drab, cold, and everything that exists is under the sign of the Word. The Word goes
dark, or often even absurd human experiences. forth from the Father, comes to dwell in our midst and then returns
ØCelebrations of the word of God on pilgrimages, special to the Father in order to bring with him the whole of creation which
feasts, popular missions, spiritual retreats and special days of was made in him and for him” (VD 121).
penance, reparation or pardon (VD 65). 4.3. Dark Passages and the Dynamism of Private Revelations
ØThe importance of silence in relation to the word of God and VD qualifies certain puzzling passages of the Bible whose meaning
its reception in the lives of the faithful must be emphasised. As is not yet comprehended convincingly as dark passages. The dark
it did in Mary, woman of the word, the word, in fact, can only passages of scripture must be approached with the light of the mystery
be spoken and heard in silence, outward and inward. Only in
of Christ. “I encourage scholars and pastors to help all the faithful to
silence can the word of God find a home in us, and,
approach these [dark] passages through an interpretation which
inseparably, woman of silence. Our liturgies must facilitate this
134 135
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
enables their meaning to emerge in the light of the mystery of Christ.” are for everyone the permanent path of salvation.” (Verbum
(VD 42). Exegetes must not limit themselves to historical analysis; Domini 14)
they must also explain the meaning of God’s word for today. 5. Text, Con-text, and Pre-Text: Orality and Textuality
“Catholic exegetes must never forget that what they are interpreting in Liturgy
is the word of God. Their common task is not finished when they
have simply determined sources, defined forms or explained literary The document presents Church and its liturgy as the viaduct
procedures. They arrive at the true goal of their work only when between the orality and textuality of the Scripture. It is in the living
they have explained the meaning of the biblical text as God’s word dynamism of the liturgy that the dynamic quality of orality over against
for today” (VD 33) the potentially static textualization of that orality is overcome. The
document gives the Bible’s textuality its proper place, but this will
There is need for a closer working relationship between pastors, not be at the expense of other legitimate pursuits. The relationship
exegetes and theologians. The document invites for a closer between “words” ( verb a) and “things” (res) is an arbitrary one.10
working relationship between pastors, exegetes and theologians Words are defined on the basis of their usage within the language
(VD 45). A “hermeneutic of faith” has “necessary implications for and on the basis of their relationship to other words within the same
exegetical and theological formation, particularly that of candidates semantic field.11 Denial of this liturgical dimension of the Word would
for the priesthood” (VD 47). It is here in this context that the lead us to the erroneous conclusion of separating the ttext from its
document points to a fundamental criterion of biblical author. As Caputo argues, “The birth of Christian tradition(s)
hermeneutics: the primary setting for scriptural interpretation is depended upon the death of its author, not because he died for our
the life of the Church. This is not to uphold the ecclesial context as sins and to establish his church, but because while he lived he was
an extrinsic rule to which exegetes must submit, but rather is preaching something else. Christian tradition(s) is a living example
something demanded by the very nature of the Scriptures and the of the need for the hermeneutics of the death of the author and of
way they gradually came into being.” (VD 29). ignoring the Founder’s intentions.”12 Liturgy thus becomes the space
The faithful need to be taught to distinguish the word of God where the text, con-text, and pre-text of the scripture are evolved.13
from private revelations, which can help us live that word more fully 6. Biblical Deconstruction and Liturgy
in a certain period of history. After discussing the completeness of
all revelation in Jesus Christ, Pope Benedict XVI notes that “the Deconstructionism is basically a theory of textual criticism or
Synod pointed to the need to ‘help the faithful to distinguish the interpretation that denies there is any single correct or universally
word of God from private revelations’ whose role ‘is not to accepted meaning or interpretation of a passage or text. It denies
‘complete’ Christ’s definitive revelation, but to help live more fully the idea of absolute principles and promotes particularities. At the
by it in a certain period of history’. . . . A private revelation can heart of the deconstructionist theory of interpretation are two primary
introduce new emphases, give rise to new forms of piety, or deepen ideas. First is the idea that no passage or text can possibly convey a
older ones. It can have a certain prophetic character (cf. 1 Th 5:19- single reliable, consistent, and coherent message to everyone who
21) and can be a valuable aid for better understanding and living the reads or hears it. The second is that the author who wrote the text is
Gospel at a certain time; consequently it should not be treated lightly. less responsible for the piece’s content than are the impersonal forces
It is a help which is proffered, but its use is not obligatory. In any of culture such as language and the author’s unconscious
event, it must be a matter of nourishing faith, hope and love, which ideology. This approach in hermeneutics leads to relativisation of
the revealed truths.
136 137
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
The deconstructionist thinks that he can discover a personal or Pope Benedict reminds us, we come into contact with the Word in
social motivation behind what Scripture says and therefore can the created order of the universe, which is the liber natura.
determine what is “really being said.” The result is a subjective Endnotes
interpretation of the passage in question. Instead of accepting what
the Bible actually says, the deconstructionist is arrogant enough to 1 Instrumentum Laboris: The Word of God in the Life And Mission of the
Church, 2008, 43.
think he can determine the motive behind what was written and
2 Carl E. Braaten, New Directions in Theology Today, vol. 2, History and
come up with the “real” or “hidden” meaning of the text. Hermeneutics, gen. ed. William Hordern (Philadelphia: Westminster
However, the liturgical celebration of the Word of God helps us Press, 1966), 151.
to overcome the dilemma caused by the linguistic deconstruction. 3 For details see, Bonnie Howe, Joel B. Green (eds.), Cognitive Linguistic
Explorations in Biblical Studies (Boston: Walter de Gruyter, 2014)
The words of Sacred Scripture are unlike any other that we ever
hear. God reveals himself to us through the Scriptures. Together as 4 See, Thorleif Bomann, Hebrew Thought Compared With Greek (New
York: Norton, 1970), 206.
a community “we believe” that all of Scripture is inspired by the
5 Rabbi Jonathan Sacks, “re’eh – Seeing and Hearing,” Covenant and
Holy Spirit and must be revered as truly being God’s Word. In Conversation (London: SCM, 2008) 232.
hearing God’s Word, we come to know the depth of his love for us 6 For a counter argument see, Michael Carasik, Theologies of Mind in
and our responsibilities as followers of Jesus. Thus liturgy liberates Biblical Israel SBL -85 (Atlanta, SBL, 2008) and Yael Avrahami, The
us from the danger of linguistic elusiveness. Senses of scripture: Sensory Perception in the Hebrew Bible
(Bloomsbury: T&T Clark, 2011) argue for the centrality of sight in
Conclusion: Hearing, Seeing and Touching the Word of Hebrew epistemology.
God 7 See Bradley Nassif, “The ‘Spiritual Exegesis’ of Scripture: The School
of Antioch Revisited,” Anglican Theological Review 75, pp. 437-470).
Hearing, seeing, and touching the Word of Life involves making
8 Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), 13: AAS 91 (1999),
a radical new commitment to God’s word. It means that we have to 16.
learn to see and use Scripture in new ways. It entails living a life 9 In Psalmum 147: CCL 78, 337-338.
immersed in Scripture so that we see our existence through God’s
10 See Ernesti, Institutio interpretis Novi Testamenti, 8; Saussure, Cours
word and in turn engage the world around us as a biblical people, a de Linguistique Generale, 67-69.
people of the Word. In Verbum Domini, the Pope reminds us that 11 James Barr, Semantics of Biblical Language. 123.
hearing the Word of God can happen in many places and in many
12 John D. Caputo, More Radical Hermeneutics: On Not Knowing Who
ways, but the most significant way that we encounter the Word of We Are (Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 2000)
God is in our liturgical celebrations. Just as the two disciples on the 215.
road to Emmaus recognized the risen Lord in the breaking of the 13 David H. Kelsey, The Uses of Scripture in Recent Theology
bread, so, too, we are invited to see the Word of God in the Eucharist. (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1975), ix.
Seeing the Word involves not only a spiritual reality, it entails
engaging the text using all of the means at our disposal. It is not
enough to engage the Word in a spiritual sense; we are obliged to
interpret it using modern scholarly techniques as well as the universe
before us where the cosmic liturgy is taking place. Just as we touch
the Word of the Lord in the physicality of the Eucharist, so, too,
138 139
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
struggle to liberate the oppressed peoples of the world.3 Allowing
for other savior figures besides Christ has led to the accusation of a
“Christian polytheism.” Hans Küng went to the extend of affirming
that a person “is to be saved within the religion that is made available
to him in his historical situation. Hence it is his right and duty to seek
Chapter 12 God within that religion in which the hidden God has already found
him.”4 Calling for a “global religious vision,” John Hick avers that it
is no longer necessary “to insist . . . upon the uniqueness and
superiority of Christianity; and it may be possible to recognize the
separate validity of the other great world religions . .”5
Finality of Revelation
The reasons for the relativisation of Christian dogmas according to
Cardinal Ratzinger is manifold: The radical opposition posited between
the logical mentality of the West and the symbolic mentality of the East;
the subjectivism that regards reason as the only source of knowledge,
the metaphysical emptying of the historical incarnation of the Eternal

T
he finality of revelation in the person of Jesus, Logos, reduced to a mere appearing of God in history; the eclecticism
as argued by DV is seriously challenged and of theologians who uncritically absorb ideas from a variety of
called into question for a radical reformation. philosophical and theological contexts without regard for consistency
The movement had already started with the rise of neo-
Protestant theology in the eighteenth century and neo- with Christian truth and the tendency to read and to interpret Sacred
Catholic theology in the twentieth century, the Scripture outside the Tradition and Magisterium of the Church (DI, 3).
exclusivistic claims of traditional Christian faith are 2. The Perimeters of Theology
radically called into question. Schleiermacher (d. 1834)
made this idea clearer in his famous statement: “Let In tracing the various global and Indian trends that deny the finality
none offer the seekers a system making exclusive claim of revelation, we prefer to locate three such major domains: (i)
to truth, but let each man offer his characteristic, Trinitarian domain, (ii) Christological domain, ecclesiological domain.
individual presentation.”1 In what follows we will analyse these domains succinctly.
The new trend had reached its zenith with the rise 2.1 Trinitarian Domain
of the “theology of religions,” that challenged the The most fundamental Christian doctrine of Trinity is subjected
traditional understanding of the uniqueness of Christian to serious scrutiny in the contemporary theological circles. One may
revelation.2 For example, Paul Knitter argues that we even suspect that the ancient Trinitarian heresies are revisiting us.
need to “recognize the possibility that other ‘saviours’ Apart from being heresies these new hermeneutics of the doctrines
have carried out . . . for other people” the redemptive are paving the way for a great amount of confusion in theology.
work which as Christians we know in Jesus Christ. For Certain influential hermeneutical approaches in Trinitarian theology
Knitter the common ground of religion exists in the
are analysed under this session.

140 141
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
2.1.1 Unresolved Tension between Trinity and Incarnation Hans Kung, on the other hand critiques the doctrine of the Trinity
In the theology of religions two extreme positions are suggested as it relates to inter-religious dialogue between adherents of Judaism,
regarding the relationship between the mystery of Holy Trinity and Christianity, and Islam. He argues: I shall try to sum up in three
incarnated Son of God. On the one hand certain theologians, for sentences what seems to me to be the biblical nucleus of the traditional
example Reimundo Panikkar in the East, are emphasising the doctrine of the Trinity, in light of the New Testament considered for
importance of Holy Trinity at the outlay of the mystery of incarnation. today: 10
According to them the incarnated Jesus is only a means for getting o To believe in God the Father means to believe in the one
access to the mystery of the Trinity. On the other hand, certain God, creator, preserver and perfecter of the world and
theologians, for example Hans Kung in the West, argue that the humankind; Judaism, Christianity, and Islam have this belief in
doctrine of Trinity, which is biblically unfounded, is a real obstruction one God in common.
in the theology of religion. o To believe in the Holy Spirit means to believe in God’s effective
Against the western dialectical approach to the understanding of might and power in human beings and the world: Jews,
reality, Reimundo Panikkar proposes the holistic approach of the Christians, and Muslims also have this belief in God’s Spirit in
advaitic intuition as the adequate epistemological principle to common.
comprehend the reality. To proclaim Jesus apart from the mystery o To believe in the Son of God means to believe in the revelation
of the Holy trinity, according to him, is to preach him as an idol. of the one God in the man Jesus of Nazareth who is thus
Such an approach, according to Panikkar, would result in evaluating God’s Word, Image and Son.
Christians by Hindus as “people who worship God under the name
and form of Jesus.”6 Reality, according to Panikkar, is three Kung redefines the doctrine of the Trinity as follows: (1) the one
dimensional, cosmotheandric or theanthropocosmic. Panikkar is of God is exclusively the Father, (2) the Holy Spirit is the power of
the opinion that when we limit the reality of Christ exclusively to the God, and (3) Jesus’ uniqueness is that God the Father has revealed
historical person of Jesus of Nazareth, we are restricting, if not Himself fully in Him. Kung adds, “For the New Testament, as for
denying his divinity. According to him, what the Christians have to the Hebrew Bible, the principle of unity is clearly the one God (ho
proclaim is the Trinitarian Christ, who is not “exhausted” in time, theos: the God = the Father).
who alone can be totally human and totally divine.7 The uniqueness There is probably no better story in the New Testament to show
of Christ lies in his ability to relate with the entire world on behalf of us the relationship of Father, Son and Spirit than that of the speech
God and to God on behalf of the human beings. To identify Christ, made by the proto-martyr Stephen in his own defence, which has
who according to Panikkar is the symbol of relationship between been handed down to us by Luke in his Acts of the Apostles. During
God and man, to any historical figure is “idolatry” and “sin against this speech Stephen had a vision: ‘But he, full of the Holy Spirit,
the Spirit.” 8 The historical figure of Jesus is significant for Panikkar gazed into heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at
only in so far as it helps us to go deeper into the trans-historical the right hand of God; and he said, “Behold, I see the heavens opened
mystery of Christ the Lord, that is the Christ of Trinity. Here and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God.”‘ So here we
Panikkar’s view is similar to that of Stanley Samartha who argues have God, Jesus the Son of Man, and the Holy Spirit. The apostle
that one should not limit Christ to Jesus nor elevate Jesus to the Paul sees this in a very similar way: God himself creates salvation
status of God, because in the former we turn Christ into a tribal God through Jesus Christ in the Spirit.
of the Christians and in the latter we fall into Christo-monism.9
142 143
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
2.1.2 Ecclesial Economy of the Incarnated Word and the the suggestion of the mission of the eternal Word somehow tries to
Universal Mission of the Eternal Word delimit the scope of the salvific mission of the Church. The economy of
Exploring the possibilities within the theological distinction between the eternal Word is often argued to be unrelated to the Church and is
immanent and economic Trinity, certain contemporary theologians valid also outside the Church. The mission of the eternal Logos would
have come up with the two missions of the Word in the two have a greater universal value than the mission of the incarnated Logos,
dimensions of the Trinity. As Dominus Iesus had pointed out the which is limited to Christians.
contemporary trend of presenting two economies of salvation, that This suggestion of the two missions of the Word is against the teachings
is, universal economy of the eternal Word and the ecclesial economy of the Councils that taught , “the one and the same Son, our Lord Jesus
of the incarnated Word, is detrimental to the doctrine of the Church. Christ, the same perfect in divinity and perfect in humanity, the same
The document emphatically rejects: “the thesis of a twofold salvific truly God and truly man..., one in being with the Father according to the
economy, that of the eternal Word, which would be universal and divinity and one in being with us according to the humanity..., begotten
valid also outside the Church, and that of the incarnate Word, which of the Father before the ages according to the divinity and, in these last
would be limited to Christians.” The declaration reasserts the unicity days, for us and our salvation, of Mary, the Virgin Mother of God,
of the salvific economy of the one incarnate Word, Jesus Christ according to the humanity.”
“and insists that his paschal mystery is “the sole and universal source It is likewise contrary to the Catholic faith to introduce a separation
of salvation for all humanity.” As Richard P. McBrien of Notre between the salvific action of the Word as such and that of the Word
Dame University observes, “No evolutionary or universal Christology made man. With the incarnation, all the salvific actions of the Word of
is consistent with the Catholic tradition which breaks the unique and God are always done in unity with the human nature that he has assumed
definitive connection between Jesus of Nazareth and the Christ of for the salvation of all people. The one subject which operates in the
the cosmos.”11 two natures, human and divine, is the single person of the Word.13
The problem involved in delineating beween the missions of the Word 2.1.3. Mission of Jesus and the Mission of the Holy Spirit
had already been suggested by John Paul II as he explicitly declared:
“To introduce any sort of separation between the Word and Jesus Christ There is a growing tendency to separate the salvific mission of
is contrary to the Christian faith... Jesus is the Incarnate Word - a single the Holy Spirit from that of the historical Jesus. The Catholic faith
and indivisible person... Christ is none other than Jesus of Nazareth; he emphatically says that the salvific work of the Holy Spirit cannot be
is the Word of God made man for the salvation of all... In the process of separated from that of the risen Christ, because there is only a single
discovering and appreciating the manifold gifts - especially the spiritual Trinitarian economy, willed by the Father and realized in the mystery
treasures - that God has bestowed on every people, we cannot separate of Christ by the working of the Holy Spirit. Several theological
those gifts from Jesus Christ, who is at the centre of God’s plan of problems are involved in this vision of separation between the
salvation.”12 Christological and Pneumatoligical missions:
The separation between the Incarnated logos and the eternal logos 1. It denies the salvific incarnation of the Word as a trinitarian
is usually made with the intention of presenting historical complementarity event. In the New Testament, the mystery of Jesus, the Incarnate Word,
with other revelatory and salvific figures. More concretely, for some, constitutes the place of the Holy Spirit’s presence as well as the principle
Jesus would be one of the many faces which the Logos has assumed in of the Spirit’s effusion on humanity, not only in messianic times
the course of time to communicate with humanity in a salvific way.Again (cf. Acts 2:32-36; Jn 7:39, 20:22; 1 Cor 15:45), but also prior to his

144 145
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
coming in history (cf. 1 Cor 10:4; 1 Pet 1:10-12). The Father’s salvific in the one God does not rescind from diversity but rather includes it
plan for all humanity icludes the mystery of the Christ event which is to a certain extent”, Walter Kasper points out, “lies in the Trinitarian
done in communion with his Spirit. confession of one God in three persons.... It means that the one and
2. It is not theologycally fair to state that the salvific action of Jesus only God is not a solitary God, but from eternity is self-giving love in
Christ is limited within the Church while that of the Spirit is extended which the Father communicates with the Son, and the Father and
beyond the Church. Christ with and through his Spirit, extends beyond the Son with the Holy Spirit”. It is this self-renunciation and selfless
the visible boundaries of the Church to all humanity. II Vatican Council communication on the part of Jesus Christ that is the basis of his
explains the impact of the paschal mystery as, “All this holds true not invitation to the other religions “to reach their own fullness and
only for Christians but also for all men of good will in whose hearts completion.”14
grace is active invisibly. For since Christ died for all, and since all men 2.2 Christological Domain
are in fact called to one and the same destiny, which is divine, we must The mystery of incarnation and the person of Jesus was a recurrent
hold that the Holy Spirit offers to all the possibility of being made partners, riddle in the theological circles even of the first centuries. Many of
in a way known to God, in the paschal mystery.”37 the errors in doctrine denounced in the early councils continue as
3. The Spirit who is acively and dynamically present in the heart of errors of Christian faith today. Contemporary theologians carry the
the people, cultures and religions who sows the ‘seeds of the word’ repercussions of those earlier heretical teachings by denying the
present in various customs and cultures, preparing them for full maturity divinity of Jesus by counting him to be a godly man with exemplary
in Christ, is the same Spirit who was at work in the incarnation and in life and message. There are theological streams that deny the salvific
the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus and who is at work in the significance of the Christ-event and the doctrine of the incarnation.
Church. Any attempt to sepearate these missions is contradicting the Some of those trends are discussed in what follows:
truth. 2.2.1 Universalism versus Historicity in Christology
4. There is only one salvific economy of the One and Triune God, Denial of the traditional emphasis of the historical particularity of
realized in the mystery of the incarnation, death, and resurrection of the the Christ-event is one of the salient features of modern Christology
Son of God, actualized with the cooperation of the Holy Spirit, and particularly of Indian Christology. For example, Stanley Samartha
extended in its salvific value to all humanity and to the entire universe argues, to make the claims regarding Christ “absolutely singular and
(DI, 12). to maintain that meaning of the Mystery is revealed only in one
We shall not be tempted to think that the Catholic faith denies the particular person and in one particular point, and nowhere else, is to
possibility of mission of the Holy Spirit outside the frontiers of the ignore one’s neighbours who have other points of references.”15
Church. As Walter Kasper says, “The Spirit of God is present and The universal salvific plan of God is often considered to be the point
at work everywhere, limited by neither space nor time”. The Spirit of departure for Indian Christian theology. The Christ event is one
“can be at work outside the visible Church and... in diverse ways... of the several moments of the revelation of God’s universal salvific
does act in a hidden manner”. Bishop Kasper reminds us, “rejected plan, which is being continually revealed through the mediation of
the old, exclusionary theory and practice, according to which, since the Spirit in other religious traditions as well.
Jesus Christ is the one and only mediator of salvation, Before analyzing the concept of pluralism, we shall not fail to
outside of acknowledging him, i.e., ‘outside the Church,’ there is observe that the term pluralism in the theology of religions has
no salvation...”. “The most profound reason that profession of faith attained new semantic domains. As Terrence Merrigan has pointed
146 147
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
out, many theologians see plurality as the “recognition of the co- as an abstract metaphysical principle out there.”21 He continues to
validity and the co-efficacy of other religions.”16 He is of the opinion argue that Hick’s concept of God as “real” and Smith’s concept of
that, “Within the framework of pluralist discourse, the term ‘plurality’ God “as transcendental” is guided by the principle of subjectivism,
no longer denotes the mere fact of multiplicity or diversity. It now having no criteria to judge them. Unlike the Christian concept of
includes the concept of “parity,” or at least of rough parity, that is to God, “God of pluralism is beyond the modes of human conceptuality
say, the quality or state of being equal or equivalent.”17 He summarises and demands nothing [neither obedience nor worship] from the
universalistic vision of the pluralist theologians into the following four believers.” 22 Gavin D`Costa rightly deems that the God of the
points: pluralists’ is “modernity’s God,”23 because the pluralists totally
(1) Humanity’s religious history can only adequately be disregard the significance of the historical dimension of divine
understood, as a single, universal process. (2) From a religious revelation.
point of view, this process has its source/goal in an ineffable mystery. Leslie Newbigin, the Anglican bishop of Madras, in his approach
(3) Humanity’s one religious history is played out in diverse cultural to the theology of religions, criticises every attempt of the pluralist
forms (world’s religious traditions). (4) The truest expression of theologians to demean the significance of the person of Christ in the
this history of this expression is the practice (praxis) which promotes history of human salvation. He argues: “When it is said that ‘in Jesus
human well-being.18 Christ I perceive something of God,’ it is implied that we know
The pluralist theologians place Jesus’ history within the broader enough about God apart from Jesus to be in a position to judge
frame work of universal religious history. Pluralist theology does not whether and to what extent we can recognise ‘something of him’ in
begin with scripture or tradition but with the contemporary situation. Jesus.”24

Another important attitude that is prevalent among the pluralistic One shall not try to create the impression that Catholic tradition
theologians is that, “there is nothing intrinsically more secure in a finds a dichotomy between universal salvific plan of God and the
knowledge of God which claims to rest on ‘certain historical events’ revelation in the person of Jesus. Karl Rahner, for example, suggests
… than in a knowledge of God which claims to rest upon more a wonderful link between these two realities. Rahner conceives
general historical experience (including that to which scripture bears categorical revelation as the historical display of the transcendental
witness) but which does not treat any particular events within that and supernatural experience of God. Transcendental revelation is
broad spectrum as essential.”19 There is a growing tendency among always mediated in history, because the transcendentality of human
the scholars to deny the significance of the historicity of the Christ- being has a history. There is a historical realisation and mediation of
event, in other words pluralist theologians pay little attention to explain God’s self-communication in transcendental revelation, with Jesus
what God has uniquely done in the historical person Jesus. For Christ as the climax.25 Philip Endean points out two perspectives of
example, Knitter is more concerned with Jesus’ of praxis, Hick is Rahner’s Christology: first Rahner sets his Christology within a vision
most concerned with Jesus’ consciousness of God.20 of God’s gracious gift of self to the cosmos, and second, for Rahner,
grace in us and the hypostatic union in Jesus Christ, though
The concept of God maintained by the pluralists is radically inseparable, remains distinct.” 26
different from the traditional views. Against the traditional Christian
notion of the personal God, pluralists present God as a metaphysical Human being has an inclination to search for the infinite. He or
principle. As A. Pragasam observes, “the God of pluralists is neither she moves continuously from one horizon of knowledge to another
personal nor impersonal, being beyond these categories, it is seen hoping for the infinite. This mutual reaching out can be seen as the

148 149
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
kernel of every religion. Religions expresses God’s search for man because of divine mercy. The presence of Jesus in the cosmos invites
and man’s response to God and vice versa. According to Rahner, us to look beyond Christianity and embrace everyone as children of
religious diversity is an inevitable consequence of humanity’s historical God.
nature. Christianity, the true religion, can take root only gradually. In 2.2.2 Relativised Inculturation Versus Revealed Religion
the meantime, God employs the other religions to realise his salvific
will in history (which of course, is not to say that these religions, as The relationship between Chrisianity and other religions was one
such, are willed by God).”27 Jesus Christ is the perfect fruit of this of the most debated issue in Indian christological scenario. The
mutual interaction. Rahner’s theology of religion is essentially western classification of the exclusive, inclusive and pluralist
pneumatological. As Kärkäinen evaluates, transcendental experience approaches in the theology of religion is generally unacceptable to
of the Spirit is expressed in the religious traditions of the world and most of the Indian theologians, because this approach, according to
reaches its apex in the final self revelation of God in Christ. Other them, is more pheneomenological rather than theological.34 The
religions also have individual moments’ of this kind, which makes ambuity in defining the true nature of the relationship between
those people “anonymous Christians.’28 Christianity and other religions is evident in the words of M. M.
Thomas as he says, “today we are engaged in discovering a post-
For Rahner, anonymous Christianity “is lived by the members of liberal and post-Kraemer theology of religions which emphasises a
other religious traditions in the sincere practice of their own traditions. common humanity in Christ rather than a common religiosity. We
Christian salvation reaches out to them, anonymously, through these have not come to anything like an adequate understanding of what
traditions.”29 It shows that one can open himself to the mystery of God has been and is doing in and with other religions.”35 The Christian
Christ without being aware of the Gospel. Christ becomes present claim of being the only religio vera is often a stumbling block to the
to the non-Christian religions efficaciously through his Spirit. Indian minds, according to whom all religious traditions are on the
Consequently, “Anonymous Christians are justified by God’s grace way to truth.
and possess the Holy Spirit.”30 Jacques Dupuis says, an “Anonymous
Christian is a Christian unawares,” and the difference he sees The inculturation approach, one of the leading trends in Indian
between the anonymous and the explicit Christian is “partly one of Christology, make use of the indigenous Christological titles, such
subjective awareness (absent in the former, present in the latter) of as avatar (the incarnate), Adipurusha (the original cosmic man),36
being a Christian.”31 By virtue of the grace of God, a person, even Satpurusha (the cosmic spiritual principle)37 etc. The rationale
without hearing explicit preaching about the Christian God, qualifies behind this approach is evident as Brahmabandhav Upadhyaya
himself or herself as an ‘anonymous Christian’ by accepting the grace reasons,
“present in an implicit form whereby [the] person undertakes and The Hindu mind is extremely subtle and penetrative, but is
lives the duty of each day in the quiet sincerity of patience, in devotion opposed to the Greco-scholatic mind method of thinking. We must
to his material duties and the demands made upon him by the person fall back on the vedantic method in formulating the catholic religion
under his care.”32 Rahner is influenced by the ancient patristic and to our country men. In fact the Vedanta must be made to do the
biblical doctrine of universal salvation. Rahner writes, “as stages in same service to the Catholic faith in India as was done by the Greek
history we might point, for instance to the teaching of Ambrose that philosophy in Europe.38
even the Catechumen who dies before baptism can attain to
salvation.”33 By the phrase ‘anonymous Christians’ Rahner refers to The pioneering attempts in this direction could be traced in the
those who participate in divine grace. No one is exempt from salvation writings of Roberto de Nobili (1577-1656).39 Denobili’s attempt
was condemned by Rome through two papal bulls: Ex quo singularis
150 151
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
and Omnium solicitudinem.40 Following this papal bulls, as Jacob is the main proponent of this view as it is evident from his famous
Kavunkal observes, Western missionaries to India had to take an work The Crown of Hinduism.46
oath before leaving their homeland, that they would not do any The inculturation approach is often guided by the philosophy of
experimentation with the cultures and the religious mission lands.41 relativism. Cardinal Ratzinger exposes this dilemma more obviously,
This prohibition which lasted until 1939 was a severe block for
developing an indigenous theology in India. Besides, the Diamper Thus it now seems actually imperative in India, even for Christian
synod (1599) convoked by the Portuguese Archbishop Menezes, theology, to extract from its particularity the figure of Christ, regarded
prevented the Indian Christians from any inter-religious interventions. as Western, and to set it beside Indian redemption myths as if it
It condemned the positive attitude of the indigenous Christians to were of similar status: the historical Jesus, so people now think, is
the non-Christians. Act III, decree 4 of the synodal canon reads: no more uniquely the Logos than any other savior figures from history
“the idea that each one can be saved in his own religion and each are.47
religion is right is fully erroneous and a most shameful heresy. There The inculturation approach is often accepted uncritically among
is no religion in which we may be saved except the religion of Christ the Indian theologians. Anyone who opposes the inculturation
our saviour.”42 This shows that the inculturation approach in approach in Christology is often counted as intolerant and impatient
christology did not get red carpet welcome in India. to the cultural variety of the rich religious tradition of India. The
The inculturation approach was later followed by Keshab Chunder problem to be addressed here is how far are we able to make use
Sen (1838-1884) who interpreted the Christian doctrine of Trinity, of the Indian philosophical and theological concepts without
using the Hindu vocabulary of Saccitananda. However, Sen’s relativising the unique truth revealed in the person of Jesus. A purely
Christology is overshadowed by the reminiscence of the early Indian Christology is a myth in itself, as it ignores the Church of
Christian heresy of adoptionism.43 Swami Vivekananda (1861- Christ, which is the living tradition of Christian faith. As Dupuis
1902), the Ramakrishna order of Hindu monks, had a great respect formulates it, “the Christ acknowledged by Hinduism is a Christ
to Jesus. Jesus, according to him, is an Avatar who experiences his delivered from the encumbrances of numerous bonds with which he
non-duality (advaita) with the Absolute. Following the Advaitic is laden by traditional Christianity.”48 Hence there seems to appear
concept, Vivekananda called Christ a Jivanmukta”44 It is obvious a radical discontinuity between the traditional Christology and the
that for Vivekananda, Christ is only one among the many avatars of Indian Christology.
the absolute. Brahmabandhav Upadhyaya (1863-1907), a The Indian way of thinking had inspired several dominant
contemporary of Vivekananda and the first among the Indian christologians of the west. For example, John Hick admits that his
Catholics to advocate for inculturation approach, made a distinction one year’s stay in India made copernican reveolution in his thinking.49
between the social and the supernatural aspect of Hinduism. Joseph Ratzinger is of the opinion that the post-metaphysical theology
According to him the pre-existent Christ is the transcendent image of Europe, converges in a remarkable way with the negative theology
of Brahman. The hypostatic union of the divine and human natures of Asia, especially of India. He argues,
in Jesus is explained as the nara-Hari (man-God) union.45
The a-religious and pragmatic relativism of Europe and America
There were Christian missionaries who reviewed the Hindu culture can borrow a kind of consecration from India, which seems to give
positively in the light of the fulfillment theory. According to this view its renunciation of dogma the dignity of a heightened reverence for
is the Indian religious culture is viewed as a preparatio evangeli the history of God and of man. Conversely, the way the European
and Christianity is the fulfillment or crown of Hinduism. J.N. Farquhar
152 153
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
and American thinking has turned back to India’s philosophical and 2.2.3 Finality of Revelation Versus Plurality of Revelation
theological vision has the effect of further strengthening that relativizing
In the first part of DI, it observes a perceived tendency on the
of all religious figures which is part of India’s heritage.50
part of some unnamed Catholic theologians to argue that “all religions
As Cardinal Ratzinger had observed no responsible theologian may be equally valid ways of salvation.” Among other things, those
can ever ignore the danger of relativism reflected in the above theories question “the definitive and complete character of the
mentioned approaches. We need to stand in perceptible continuity revelation of Jesus. Some theologians are trying to deny the finality
with the ancient ecumenical councils. Christ is not the maturation of of divine revelation in the person of Jesus in terms of the ineffability,
the human spirit or the mirror of a transcendent ideal, or the flower hiddenness, and limitlessness of God. According to these theologians,
of humanity, but the incarnation of the preexistent Word of God, the “the fullness of the Trinity is not incarnate in Jesus. Consequently,
second person of the Trinity: in Christ we encounter the very God there is more to God, so to speak, than has been shown in Jesus
himself. Christ. God remains a Deus absconditus...”51
The biblical revelation regarding Christ cannot be negated at any Dominus Iesus opposes this relativistic mentality, which is becoming
cost. As Emil Brunner aptly called the scandal of particularity - ever more common, it is necessary above all to reassert the definitive
the inexplicable fact that God revealed himself among one particular and complete character of the revelation of Jesus Christ. It must be firmly
people in history, the Jews, that God became man at one point in believed that, in the mystery of Jesus Christ, the Incarnate Son of God,
history, and that his revelation in this people and in this person is who is “the way, the truth, and the life” (Jn 14:6), the full revelation of
definitive and final. God revealed himself once for all in this particular divine truth is given. DV also states this fact unambiguously: “By this
event or events. The uniqueness of Christianity lies in its willingness revelation then, the deepest truth about God and the salvation of man
to be continually purified and reformed in the light of the one great shines forth in Christ, who is at the same time the mediator and the
revelation of God in Jesus Christ, which cannot be duplicated but fullness of all revelation”.9 It is only by affirming the finality of Revelation
only heralded and obeyed. It cannot be simply nullified by means of in Jesus Christ the Church can affirm its mission of evangelization. As
using certain loan words from various cultures. the Encyclical Redemptoris missio calls for: “In this definitive Word of
Karl Barth has been helpful in his conception of “little lights” and his revelation, God has made himself known in the fullest possible way.
“other true words” that the Christian is able to discern in nature and He has revealed to mankind who he is. This definitive self-revelation of
in other religions by virtue of the one great light of Christ that makes God is the fundamental reason why the Church is missionary by her
these lesser lights and words intelligible and credible. In his later very nature. She cannot do other than proclaim the Gospel, that is, the
writings Barth alluded to a third circle of witnesses outside the Bible fullness of the truth which God has enabled us to know about himself”.11
and the Church that magnify the name of Christ and testify to his The distinction made by Dominus Iesus between theological
goodness. But only people of faith by virtue of the opening of their faith and belief in the other religions cannot be overlooked. Rather it
eyes to the revelation of the glory of God in Jesus Christ can validly must be borne in mind in current theological reflection. Faith is the
assess these other words and lights, which always constitute
acceptance in grace of revealed truth, which makes it possible to penetrate
something alien and discordant in the systems and credos of the
the mystery in a way that allows us to understand it coherently. Belief, in
world of unbelief. I fully agree with Gregory of Nyssa that “we cannot
the other religions, is that sum of experience and thought that constitutes
see God in nature, but we can try to see nature in God.”
the human treasury of wisdom and religious aspiration, which man in his
154 155
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
search for truth has conceived and acted upon in his relationship to God complementary to his.”53 (DI, No. 14). As for God’s acting salvifically
and the Absolute (DI, 7). outside the Church, O’Collins cites Dominus Jesus itself in
It is the finality of revelation in Christ Jesus that makes the inspired acknowledging that God becomes present to people through the
value of the sacred Scripture significant. Even though the sacred books “spiritual riches” that their religions essentially embody and express
of other religions contain elements which may be de facto instruments (n. 8). The “elements of religiosity” found in the diverse “religious
by which countless people throughout the centuries have been and still traditions” come “from God” (n. 21). Religious pluralism, therefore,
are able today to nourish and maintain their life-relationship with God., does not simply exist in fact, as the declaration insists, but also in
the Church’s tradition, however, reserves the designation of inspired principle. We should realize the judicious distinction made by
texts to the canonical books of the Old and New Testaments, since O’Collins regarding the various understandings of pluralism in
these are inspired by the Holy Spirit. principle. Accepting other religions are part of divine economy is
radically different from arguing other religions as separate and equal
Gerald O’Collins, SJ, of the Gregorian University, has made this paths of salvation alongside with the Christ-event. O’Collins suggests,
idea in a clearer perspective. In one sense, to be sure, Jesus Christ that we might all do well to abandon the language of pluralism
embodies and communicates the fullness of revelation, but in another altogether. He writes: “We are better off thinking in terms of the
sense he does not. The final vision of God is still to come, as we are incredible love poured out on all humanity by the Father, the Son,
reminded in 1 John 3:2 (“...what we shall be has not yet been and the Holy Spirit”.54
revealed”) and 1 Corinthians 13:12 (“At present we can see
indistinctly, as in a mirror, but then face to face”). The problem arises Just as selective hermeneutics of the Bible is dangerous to its
only when we try to contradict between what is revealed and what message, a selective reading of a magisterial teaching will not bring
is yet to be revealed.52 forth an integral vision of the Church. As Cardinal Carlo Maria
Martini once observed no Catholic document should be read in
The DI does not deny the significance of other religions. In fact it isolation. For example, Dominus Iesus does not negate any of the
states the contrary. Bearing in mind the Catholic articles of faith, the teachings of either II Vatican council or other magisterial
documents invites the theologians to explore, reflect on the existence of pronouncements. Cardinal Martini suggested that the document
other religious experiences and on their meaning in God’s salvific plan Dominus Iesus should be read in the light of “the wider and more
and they must be able to explain in what way the historical figures and encouraging framework” of the 1995 papal encyclical, Ut unum
positive elements of these religions may fall within the divine plan of sint. In a similar tone, Cardinal Roger Mahony, then Archbishop of
salvation. In this undertaking, theological research has a vast field of Los Angeles, observes that the fact that a particular document may
work under the guidance of the Church’s Magisterium. The Second not fully reflect the deeper understanding that has been achieved
Vatican Council, in fact, has stated that: “the unique mediation of the through ecumenical and interreligious dialogues over the past
Redeemer does not exclude, but rather gives rise to a manifold decades of the post Vatican era does not mean that the Church has
cooperation which is but a participation in this one source” (GS 10). The gone back from all its previous positions. Certain documents are
content of this participated mediation should be explored more deeply, reactions to the counter culture and correctives to the erroneous
but must remain always consistent with the principle of Christ’s unique teachings and they shall be interpreted within its context. Otherwise,
mediation: “Although participated forms of mediation of different kinds we are likely to fall into the tendency and methodology adapted by
and degrees are not excluded, they acquire meaning and value only from the common media analysts who would focus on the plausible
Christ’s own mediation, and they cannot be understood as parallel or negatives with vested interests.55

156 157
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
2.2.4 Person of Jesus versus Message of Jesus worldly and temporal. Jesus lived and died in vain, if he did not
It is a growing tendency among the theologians both in the East teach us to regulate the whole of life by the eternal law of love.”58 In
and West to give more importance to the message of Christ than to the Gandhian approach, the message of Jesus surpasses the person
the person of Christ. In other words, they advocate a Christology of Jesus. Even if the Jesus of Nazareth had never lived in the history,
that is centered on the kingdom of God preached by Christ rather “the sermon of the mount is still valid for me.”
than on the person of Christ. To mention an example from the West, These approaches often forget the reality that the person of Christ
this approach could be traced in the writings of Donald G. Dawe, and his message cannot be separated. Church should witness to the
whose basic tenets of Christology could be summarized into three truth of the Jesus Christ in the very midst of society in the hope and
main articles: (1) The name of Jesus is the encoding of the motif of expectation that this truth will work as the leaven that turns society
death as resurrection as the key to the new being. This pattern is toward a higher degree of justice and freedom. The Church should
encountered in many religions. (2) The worship due to him is the serve the kingdom of righteousness by reminding the world that there
willingness to accept dying to the self as the way to life. (3) The is a transcendent order that stands in judgment over every worldly
finality of Christ is in the unconditioned way in which he points beyond achievement and that the proper attitude of leaders of nations is one
himself, even to the point of surrendering his selfhood, so that human of humility before a holy God and caring concern for the disinherited
kind may find healing in the unconditioned.56 and the oppressed.
This view is shared also by many Christian and non-Christian The holy and living God of the Scriptures has acted decisively
theologians of India. For example, being a rationalist, Ram Mohan for the salvation of the human race through Jesus Christ. The hope
Roy did not accept the divinity of Jesus, though he was very much of humanity rests on the message of Jesus, that is, the kingdom of
fascinated by the ethical teachings of Jesus, as having universal value God, which is now at work in our midst and will be consummated
and implications. He observes: “The consequence of my long and through the coming again of Jesus Christ in power and glory.
uninterrupted researches into religious Truth has been that I have 2.3 Ecclesiological Domain
found the doctrine of Christ more conductive to moral principles
and better adapted for the use of rational beings than any others The salvific role of the Church in the divine economy of salvation
which have come to my knowledge.”57 Jesus according to this view is another area of debate in contemporary theology. It is true that
becomes one of the best paradigms to lead an ethically sound life. the magisterium accepts the possibility of salvation outside the
frontiers of the Church. Pius IX (Quanto conficiamur moerore,
Another typical representative of this group is Mahatma Gandhi. August 10, 1863) taught: “God... in His supreme goodness and
According to Gandhi truth (sat) is God. The only means to attain clemency, by no means allows anyone to be punished with eternal
truth is non-violence (ahimsa) which cannot be attained without punishments who does not have the guilt of voluntary fault.” Vatican
self-denial and self-control (Brahmacharya). For Gandhi, the central II (LG, 16) taught the same: “They who without their own fault do
message of Jesus is the Sermon on the mount, which according to not know of the Gospel of Christ and His Church, but yet seek God
him is the manifesto of non-violence. The Christ-event was the acting with sincere heart, and try, under the influence of grace, to carry out
out of the message of non-violence. He claims to be an ethical follower His will in practice, known to them through the dictate of conscience,
of Jesus. “Though I cannot claim to be a Christian in the sectarian can attain eternal salvation.” Pius XII in Mystici Corporis Christi
sense, the example of Jesus’ suffering is a factor in the composition pointed out that one can “be related to the Church by a certain
of my underlying faith in non-violence, which rules all my actions, desire and wish of which he is not aware”, i.e., by the desire to do
158 159
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
what God wills in general. However, these teachings in no way can Christ and the Church can neither be confused nor separated, and
be interpreted to disprove the salvific significance of the Church in constitute a single “whole Christ.” This same inseparability is also
the divine economy of salvation. expressed in the New Testament by the analogy of the Church as the
2.3.1 Mission of Christ and the Mission of the Church Bride of Christ (cf. 2 Cor 11:2; Eph 5:25-29; Rev 21:2,9). Just as there
is one Christ, so there exists a single body of Christ, a single Bride of
The theological ambiguity created by some ecclesiologists in Christ. The promises of the Lord that he would not abandon his Church
separating the salvific mission of Jesus Christ and the Catholic Church (cf. Mt 16:18; 28:20) and that he would guide her by his Spirit
is another issue wrestled with in contemporary dogmatics. Against (cf. Jn 16:13) mean, according to Catholic faith, the inseperability
the view that Christ can be separated from his Church, the Catholic between Christ and his Church.
faith categorically hold the view that there exists a historical continuity
between Christ and the Church founded by Christ, that is, the 2.3.2 Kingdom of God and the Church
Catholic Church. Jesus did not only establish a simple community of The modern theories, that tend to divorce radically between the
disciples, but constituted the Church as a salvific mystery: he himself is kingdom of God and the Church are detrimental to Catholic faith.
in the Church and the Church is in him (cf. Jn 15:1ff.; Gal 3:28; Eph 4:15- The modern views try to create an area outside of, and even
16; Acts 9:5). Therefore, the fullness of Christ’s salvific mystery belongs independently of, the Church where God’s saving activity is at work
also to the Church, inseparably united to her Lord (DI, 16). on behalf of non-Christians. A typical representative of this view
Some of the Indian ecclesiologians believe that within the specific from the Indian subcontinent might be the “Christ-centred humanist
socio-economic context of the country, where the vast majority of approach” 60 suggested by M.M Thomas. Christ, according to
people are exploited and marginalized by a powerful minority, the Thomas, is a great social liberator which is visualized in his teachings
Church has a specific mission to fight against the evil forces that on the kingdom of God. The title of his main work “Salvation and
prevent the establishment of the kingdom of God. Consequently, Humanization”61 sheds light on the nature of his Christology. The
Church is believed to have the duty of engaging with every movement fundamental premise of Thomas’s Christology is that, because Christ
that strives for social justice. Amalorpavadass criticizes the Indian is the principle and goal of creation, every attempt for the betterment
church leaders for not engaging actively in these movements: “Often of any creation is related to Christ. What Jesus has done and taught
it [the Indian Church] was not only absent from them [the social towards the establishment of the kingdom, according to him, is more
movements for justice] but even undermined them by calling significant than who Jesus is.
Christians away from the struggles in the name of peace.”59 It is The mission of the Church is “to proclaim and establish among all
obvious that there is ample room for social intervention in Catholic peoples the kingdom of Christ and of God, and she is on earth, the seed
ecclesiology as it encourages the faithful to situate dynamically against and the beginning of that kingdom.” Seperating between Christ,
the oppressive forces and structures of evil. However, the Kingdom and Church will give rise to the following theological lacunas:
ecclesiological tension occurs when the Church is understood only 1. Church being the “people gathered by the unity of the Father, the
as an agent of social reformation. This is a kind of non-ecclesial Son and the Holy Spirit, is “the kingdom of Christ already present
Christology, because it pays no attention to the church in explaining in mystery”71 and constitutes its seed andbeginning (DI, 18).
and understanding the mystery of Christ. This approach at times
even considers the Church as a barrier for understanding the mystery 2. The kingdom of God which we know from revelation, “cannot
of Christ. be detached either from Christ or from the Church... If the kingdom

160 161
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
is separated from Jesus, it is no longer the kingdom of God which the power of intercession neither of priestly prayer nor on account
he revealed. The Kingdom seperated from Christ and the Church of the worthiness of the recipient, but solely by the power of Christ.
would become a purely human or ideological goal and a distortion The power of Christ lives in the sacraments. The effect of the
of the identity of Christ, who no longer appears as the Lord to sacrament is independent of the sinfulness or unworthiness of the
whom everything must one day be subjected (cf. 1 Cor 15:27). minister. The Church has never tolerated any subjective qualification
3. Extreme approaches of one-sided accentuations, such as of the objective effectiveness of the sacraments ex opere operato.
separation between the Kingdom and the Church as well as This would ultimately be to conceive the way of salvation as being
the radical identification of Church with the Kingdom of God, man’s way to God and not God’s way to man. Therefore, any
are equally misleading. To state the inseparable relationship theology that advocates parity of sacraments with non-Christian
between Christ and the kingdom is not to overlook the fact that religious rituals must be handled with utmost care. Dominus Iesus
the kingdom of God - even if considered in its historical phase - makes the following theological observations on this issue:
is not identified with the Church in her visible and social reality. 1. The Church is the “universal sacrament of salvation”, since, united
4. The so-called ‘kingdom centred’ theologians ignores not only always in a mysterious way to the Saviour Jesus Christ, her Head,
the Church but also the Christ-event. The kingdom of which they and subordinated to him, she has, in God’s plan, an indispensable
speak is ‘theocentrically’ based as different peoples, cultures, relationship with the salvation of every human being. Sacraments
and religions are capable of finding common ground in the one are the most effective and direct means of this salvific grace.
divine reality, by whatever name it is called. 2. Certainly, the various religious traditions contain and offer religious
5. The so-called ‘kingdom centred’ theologians put great stress on elements which come from God, and which are part of what “the
the mystery of creation, which is reflected in the diversity of cultures Spirit brings about in human hearts and in the history of peoples,
and beliefs, but they keep silent about the mystery of redemption in cultures, and religions”.
and undervalues role of the Church. They are tempted to deny 3. Indeed, some prayers and rituals of the other religions may assume
the unicity of the relationship which Christ and the Church have a role of preparation for the Gospel, in that they are occasions or
with the kingdom of God. pedagogical helps in which the human heart is prompted to be
2.3.3 Sacraments and Other Religious Rituals open to the action of God.

Equating the sacraments of the Church with the religious rituals 4. One cannot attribute to these, however, a divine origin or an ex
of the non-Christian religions is another area of discontentment opere operato salvific efficacy, which is proper to the Christian
observed in the contemporary magisterial documents. It would be sacraments.
contrary to the Catholic faith to consider the Church as a way of 5. Furthermore, it cannot be overlooked that other rituals, insofar
salvation alongside those constituted by other religions. The as they depend on superstitions or other errors, constitute an
sacraments are the living continuation of the paschal mystery of Christ. obstacle to salvation.
The effectiveness of Christ’s continuing work in his Church cannot 6. Church is primarily committed to proclaiming to all people the
be dependent on man’s inadequacy. A sacrament, administered truth definitively revealed by the Lord, and to announcing the
properly in the way established by Christ and with the proper necessity of conversion to Jesus Christ and of adherence to the
intention, gives the grace it signifies. It is effective not by reason of Church through Baptism and the other sacraments, in order to
162 163
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
participate fully in communion with God, the Father, Son and mission ad gentes. The sense of equality, which is a presupposition of
Holy Spirit. inter-religious dialogue, refers to the equal personal dignity of the parties
2.3.4 Universal Salvation Versus Necessity of Baptism in dialogue, not to doctrinal content, nor even less to the position of
Jesus Christ in relation to the founders of the other religions. The mission
The Catholic doctrine makes a clear distinction between those who of the Church is announcing the necessity of conversion to Jesus Christ
are baptised and those who are not. The relationship between the Curch and of adherence to the Church through Baptism and the other
and the so-called invisible members of the Church is a subtle theological sacraments, in order to participate fully in communion with God, the
issue. DI clearly teaches that, “For those who are not formally and Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
visibly members of the Church, salvation in Christ is accessible by virtue
of a grace which, while having a mysterious relationship to the Church, The problem of theological authority has become especially acute,
does not make them formally part of the Church” (DI, 21). The formal since it would seem that cultural experience is supplanting the biblical
relationship with the Church is possible only by means of Baptism. witness as the ruling criterion for faith and practice. Instead of
Regarding the salvation of the non-baptised the Second Vatican Council depending on the sacramental grace, a neo-Gnosticism is emerging
limited itself to the statement that God bestows it “in ways known to that locates truth in the alteration of consciousness rather than in an
himself”.83 However, from what has been stated above it would be event in sacred history. The philosopher Schopenhauer (d. 1860),
contrary to the faith to consider the Church as one way of salvation has declared that we are justified neither by faith nor by works but
alongside those constituted by the other religions. With the coming of by knowledge. Tillich’s contention that self-discovery is God-
the Saviour Jesus Christ, God has willed that the Church founded by discovery betrays a sort of Gnostic mentality we see increasingly
him be the instrument for the salvation of all humanity (cf. Acts 17:30- gaining acceptance.
31). Therefore the mentality of indifferentism “characterized by a 2.3.5 Catholic Church and Churches
religious relativism which leads to the belief that ‘one religion is as good The salvific significance of the Catholic Church is another area of
as another’ must be ruled out. Dominus Iesus clearly states that, “If it is dispute in the current theological disputes. Many Catholic theologians
true that the followers of other religions can receive divine grace, it is were opposing the ecclesial vision of Dominus Iesus.62 According
also certain thatobjectively speaking they are in a gravely deficient to them Dominus lesus proclaims that “the Church of Christ...
situation in comparison with those who, in the Church, have the fullness continues to exist only in the Catholic Church”. In fact they had
of the means of salvation” (DI, 22). However, the exalted condition of misread the document. Dominus Jesus does not say that the Church
the baptised results, not from their own merits, but from the grace of of Christ continues to exist “only” in the Catholic Church; it says
Christ. If they fail to respond in thought, word, and deed to that grace, that it is only in the Catholic Church that it continues to exist “fully.”
not only shall they not be saved, but they shall be more severely judged. The text reads as follows:
The baptism does not impart a sense of superiority over other religions
rather a sense greater resposibility to the divine economy of salvation. Therefore, there exists a single Church of Christ, which subsists in
the Catholic Church, governed by the Successor of Peter and by the
The Catholic faith affirms that those who obey the promptings of the Bishops in communion with him. The Churches which, while not existing
Spirit of truth are already on the way of salvation. The Church, to whom in perfect communion with the Catholic Church, remain united to her by
this truth has been entrusted, must dedicate herself for evangelisation. means of the closest bonds, that is, by apostolic succession and a valid
The mission of the Church shall not be restricted to Inter-religious dialogue. Eucharist, are true particular Churches. Therefore, the Church of Christ
Inter-religious dialogue is to be understood as part of her evangelizing is present and operative also in these Churches, even though they lack
164 165
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
full communion with the Catholic Church, since they do not accept the Richard P. McBrien, rightly in my opinion, argues that in changing
Catholic doctrine of the Primacy, which, according to the will of God, the verb from “est” to “subsistit in” the council fathers clearly intended
the Bishop of Rome objectively has and exercises over the entire Church to include non-Catholic churches and ecclesial communities in the
(DI, 16). one, albeit divided, Body of Christ. Otherwise, they would have left
the teaching of Pius XII in place and held to the verb “est.” 66
The document directly follows the teachings of the council’s Retaining the verb subsistit in the document of the CDF cannot be
Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, n. 8, that the one Church of blamed for going against the Spirit of ecumenism. The CDF had
Christ “subsists in” in the Catholic Church. Whatever “efficacy” non- made this stance clearer in its Notificatio, concerning Leonardo
Catholic churches and ecclesial communities may have is derived Boff’s book, Church: Charism and Power, insisting that the reason
“from the very fullness of grace and truth entrusted to the Catholic for the change of verbs in article 8 was to emphasize that there is
Church” (Decree on Ecumenism, n. 3). According to the declaration, “only one ‘subsistence’ of the true Church, while outside of her visible
to be regarded as a church “in the proper sense” rather than as an structure there only exist elementa Ecclesiae, which-being elements
ecclesial community, a non-Catholic body must possess a “valid of that same Church-tend and lead toward the Catholic Church”.
episcopate and the genuine and integral substance of the eucharistic
mystery”. Such churches are “in a certain communion, albeit Cardinal Willebrands argues this point more succinctly from a
imperfect, with the Catholic Church”. Christological point of view. According to him, the change
from ”est” to ”subsistit in” was not only ecclesiological, but also
As Francis Sullivan, SJ, of the Gregorian University and of Boston Christological - the one inseparable from the other. The two come
College, pointed out, “The difference between those statements is together in an ecclesiology of communion. He is of the opinion that,
the difference between the doctrine of Pius XII and that of Vatican “if the Church is fundamentally this communion with the Father and
II.”63 It was the teaching of Pius XII, in his encyclicals Mystici the Son in the Holy Spirit, we can see that on the one hand the
corporis and Humani generis, that the Catholic Church and the depth of this communion determines the depth of incorporation in
Mystical Body of Christ are “one and the same” (“unum idemque the Church, and on the other that it cannot be a question of all or
esse”).64 This exclusive identification was still being asserted in the nothing.... Subsistit in thus appears, in an ecclesiology of
first two drafts of the council’s Dogmatic Constitution on the communion, as an attempt to express the transcendence of grace
Church, Lumen gentium: ”The Church of Christ is the Catholic and to give an inkling of the breadth of divine benevolence”67
Church”. But the council replaced the copulative verb “is” with the Moreover, the term “church” does not apply only to those
ecclesiologically and ecumenically broader “subsists in” (n. 8). Aloys Christian communities with an episcopate and a Eucharist deemed
Grillmeier, a member of the council’s Theological Commission and “valid” by the Catholic Church. The ultimate bases for communion
subsequently named a cardinal by Pope John Paul II, wrote in his with the one Church of Christ are faith and baptism. In the words of
commentary on the text: “This means that the Roman Church, as a the Decree on Ecumenism: “For those who believe in Christ and
local church, is only part of the whole Church, though its bishop is have been properly baptized are put in some, though imperfect,
head of all the bishops of the Catholic Church”. According to communion with the Catholic Church” (n. 3). Dominus Jesus also
Grillmeier, “‘ecclesiality’ does not simply coincide with the Catholic recognizes in principle that there are non-Catholic churches in
Church, because ecclesial elements of sanctification and truth can imperfect communion with the Catholic Church. As McBrien
be found outside it.”65 observes, what Dominus Jesus does not explicitly say is that the

166 167
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
communion of these other churches is not simply with the Catholic Logos evn avrch/:| Cosmological Statement (vv. 1-5)
Church but with the Church of Christ as a whole, in which the Catholic 1A 1-2 Word with God 1 A1 Word with God having light
Church alone is “fully” incorporated. and life (4-5)69
4. Conclusion Focus: creation of the Cosmos through logos v. 3

The strong and widespread negative reactions to the document

of Dominus Iesus made the Holy Father himself to respond to them. Logos evn sa,rx (evevnsarko,j): Christological Statement)
I prefer to conclude this presentation with the observations made 2A 6-8 witnessing 2 A1 Witnessing of John, the
by Pope John Paul II on the document during the community, the OT (v.15-18)
midday Angelus blessing on October 1: The declaration (DI) “does Focus: Logos Came to the World (9-14)
not deny salvation to non-Christians but points to its ultimate source
The second section could be further explained in the following
in Christ, in whom man and God are united.” He said that “God
structure, which reveals the fact that the coming of the logos evn
gives light to all in a way which is accommodated to their spiritual
sa,rx was intended for the birth of the children of God.
and material situation, granting them salvific grace in ways known to
himself.” Moreover, the Holy Father continued, “if the document, 3A 9-10 He came to the World 3A1 14. He dwelt among us
together with the Second Vatican Council, declares that ‘the single 3B His own did not receive 3B1 We saw his glory
Church of Christ subsists in the Catholic Church’, it does not intend but many received
thereby to express scant regard for the other churches and ecclesial 3C Not from flesh, blood, man 3C1 but from God
communities”. On the contrary, “the Catholic Church... suffers from Focus: The birth of the Children of God 12-13
the fact that true particular churches and ecclesial communities with The birth of believers becomes possible by receiving70 the logo,j,
precious elements of salvation are separated from her. The document from whom everything came into being, as the centre of creation.
thus expresses once again the same ecumenical passion that is the The logo,j came to ta. i[dia,71 but oi[ i[dioi did not receive
basis of my encyclical Ut unum sint. I hope that this declaration, (pare,labon)72 him. On the basis of the active meaning of the verbs
which is close to my heart, can, after so many erroneous lamba,nw and pisteu,w we conclude that the generation as God’s
interpretations, finally fulfill its function both of clarification and of children is a gift that is received actively. John uses te,kna qeou/ to
openness.” As the document itself envisions: The Christian mystery, designate the believers specific relation to the Father73 and at the
in fact, overcomes all barriers of time and space, and accomplishes the same time to differentiate their status from uivoj, qeou/.74 The birth of
unity of the human family. the children of God (v.13) as well as that of the Son of God (v.14)
Incarnation Instigates Theosis functions as a hermeneutical key for the Johannine notion of
incarnation. Thus the incarnation, according to the fourth evangelist,
By presenting the incarnation of the only begotten Son of God as remains to be both uniting and separating the divine and human, the
paradigm for the entire cosmos, the evangelist points out the status immanent and the transcendent, the flesh and the word, the presence
of the children of God as the ultimate destiny the entire creation. and absence.
As the bipartite structure of the prologue reveals, together with According to prologue, the Logos is God, but he is not Yahweh
the beginning of the transcendental logos, the prologue presents the or God the Father. As explained in the following chiasm in vv. 1-2,
beginning of the incarnated logos and the beginning of the children the divine nature of the logos (v. 1c – o` qeo,j) is sandwiched by two
of God.68 avrch/| pro,j qeo,n phrases.75
168 169
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
evn avrch/| that cannot be avoided in any attempt to highlight the historicity of
h=n o` lo,goj( kai. o` lo,goj h=n the Christ-event. As Schillebeeckx observes, the historicity
pro.j to.n Christianity, which gives uniqueness and identity to Christianity, is
qeo,n at the same time its unavoidable historical limitation.79
kai. qeo.j The deliberately created narrative friction between the
h=n o` lo,goj. ou-toj h=n incarnational Christology and epiphanic Christology in vv.14-15
evn avrch/| pro.j further enunciates that the incarnated one embodies transcendence,
to.n qeo,n which cannot be fully reduced to the historical particularity.80 What
Thus the divinity and the finality of the Logos is explained is revealed through the incarnation is that, the divinity of the incarnated
exclusively in terms of his relationship to God. The incarnated monogenh,j is equal to the divinity of the supreme Godhead
lo, g oj is unique in his relationship to qeo, j. The adjective (1:1,18; 20:28). By emphasizing the equality as well as the
monogenh,j stresses the uniqueness of kind, and if that uniqueness subordination of Jesus to God the Father, the evangelist once again
of kind is para. patro,j, its singularity is attributable to God’s retains the tension between the historicity and transcendentality.
father-role in the origin of Logos.76 What is unique according to the The Johannine notion of the salvific role of logos could be explained
fourth evangelist is not only the Logos-Theos relationship, but the in the following diagram
dynamic Logos-Theos-Kosmos relationship. Here one finds new
way out in the theology of religions. The logos remains to be lo,goj
even outside the historical particularity of the Christ-event. The Logos
remains to be an “open narrative” that continuously challenges and
invites the cosmos to become the children of God. Logos with
creation Cosmos
God
Incarnation and Religious Pluralism
We consider the Jewish notions of ~rbD (the creative word of
God – lo,goj in LXX) and hmk.x (the wisdom that permeates, orders
and structures of the universe – sofi,a in LXX)77 as the primary Election

Vorlage of the Johannine notion of logos. Hence, logos represents

Jesus/the His own
the personification of the Theos-Kosmos relationship. monogenes
Incarnation

The fourth evangelist consistently maintains a tension between

the transcendence and historicity of the Christ-event. We are in a Children Salvation
continuous temptation to reduce this tension into either or. By
of God His own/Israel
emphasizing the distinction between the Jesus the Logos and the
logoi of Jesus,78 the evangelist saves revelation from the danger of
being reduced to textuality. The presence of the Logos in the text
(gospel) is a “presence-in-absence.” The metaphysics of presence
denies the importance of the past as well as the expectancy of the
future. In this sense “the metaphysics of presence” is an ontic evil
170 171
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
As the diagram explains the salvation history proceeds through the Johannine approach. This sort of competitive and hostile
creation, election, incarnation. Salvation is resulted by the re-creation understanding of divine revelation is exotic to the fourth evangelist.
of the children of God.81 Those who had rejected Jesus are also As Justine the Martyr explains, since the logos was eternal, all the
part of “his own.” Just as election does not negate God’s relationship right principles that philosophers and religious leaders have
with the world as creator, salvation does not deny the status of “his discovered and expressed are part (kaqa mero,j) of the Word
own” who fail to recognize God in Jesus. In other words, the evangelist and are seeds of the same Logos (spe,rma tou/ logou/ - 2
does not distinguish the salvation history from the cosmic history. Apology, 13,2,3). This is different from those positions that conceive
While emphasizing the historicity of the incarnated logo,j, the Christianity as “the fulfillment” or “crown,” of other religions which
evangelist widens the scope of the Christ-event from avrch, to are only assigned of “preparatory value.” Jesus is neither the “the
telo,j. The incarnated one is the same who was with God in unknown Christ,” “the christic-presence,” nor “the cosmotheandric
avrch, and who will come again (14:3) in teloo,j. In doing presence” in other religions. According to the fourth evangelist one
so, the evangelist not only vindicates the identity between the logos does not replace the other. Each path proceeds forward until they
ev n av r ch, and logos ev n sa, r x but also encompasses the converge at the transcendental logos, in whom they can bear witness
entire history of the cosmos within the parameters of the Christ- to the glory of God (cf. 1:15).
event. Therefore any attempt to limit the Christ-event to a particular
period of history is against the Johannine understanding of
incarnation. In John, the arche is the paradigm for the telos. Thus
the evangelist keeps the way for the other open up until eschaton.
Extreme emphasis on the incarnation of Jesus often obscures the Endnotes
equally important role of logos in creation.82 To tear incarnation away 1 Friedrich Schleiermacher, On Religion trans. John Oman (New York:
from creation damages the universalistic theological outlook of the Harper Torchbooks, 1958), p. 175.
prologue.83 Exclusivist christocentrism may turn to christomonism 2 For a detailed analysis see, Donald G. Bloesch, “The Finality of Christ
and christology to Jesusology in which the incarnated Jesus is and Religious Pluralism,” p. 6.
exclusively idolized,84 at the expense of neglecting the wider 3 For a critical analysis see Leslie Newbigin, “Religious Pluralism and the
Uniqueness of Jesus Christ” in J. I. Packer, ed.The Best in
relationship of God to his creation. The verb evskh,nwsen (v. 14) Theology (Carol Stream, IL: Christianity Today,1990) (267–274), p. 269.
which represents the temporary dwelling of God once again warns 4 Hans Küng, “The World Religions in God’s Plan of Salvation,” in Joseph
against the temptation to reduce the Logos to the enfleshed Jesus.85 Neuner, ed.Christian Revelation and World Religions(London: Burns
& Oates, 1967) (pp. 25–66), p. 52.
Mosses and the Baptist, the paradigms for the “figures of leaders” 5 John Hick,God Has Many Names (London: Macmillan, 1980), p. 88.
in the world religions, are juxtaposed with the logos, and presented 6 Raimundo Panikkar, The Trinity and the Religious Experience, p. 21.
every thing as part of the plan to be realized in Jesus. Through the 7 Raimundo Panikkar, The Unknown Christ in Hinduism, p. 28.
divinum passivum in v. 17, the evangelist establishes the fact that 8 Raimundo Panikkar, Christ’s Name in the Economy of Salvation, p. 214.
God was at work in other religious traditions. So the challenges 9 Stanley Samartha, “The Cross and the Rainbow,” John Hick and Paul
raised by the modern pluralist theologians that “If God has revealed Knitter (eds.), The Myth of Christian Uniqueness(New York: Orbis,
himself in the person of Jesus, all other revelations are thereby 1987) 69-88, p. 77.
marginalized as inferior and secondary,”86 becomes unfounded in 10 Hans Kung, Restitution of the True Doctrine of God and Christ, 23.

172 173
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
11 Richard P. McBrien, Catholicism, p. 531 28 Veli-Matti Kärkainen, Pneumatology: The Holy Spirit in Ecumenical,
12 JOHN PAULII, Encyclical Letter Redemptoris missio, 6. International, and Contextual Perspective (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker,
2002) p. 116. See also Veli-Matti Kärkainen, Christology a Global
13 Cf. ST. LEO THE GREAT,Tomus ad Flavianum:DS 294. Introduction (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 2003) pp. 140-146.
14 W. KASPER, “Relating Christ’s Universality to Interreligious Dialogue”, 29 Karl Rahner, “Christianity and the Non-Christian Religions,” in
Origins 30, 21 (2 November, 2000) 325, 326, 327. Theological Investigations 5 (London: Darton, Longman and Todd,
15 Stanley Samartha, “The Cross and the Rainbow,” p. 76. 1966) pp. 128-129.
16 Terrence Merrigan “Religious Knowledge in the Pluralist Theology of 30 Karl Rahner, “Jesus Christ in the Non-Christian Religions,” Theological
Religions,” p. 687. He refers to L. Gilkey as an example of this position: Investigations, 17 (New York: Crossroad, 1981) p. 43. See also Veli-
Langdon Gilkey, “Plurality and its Theological Implications,” in John Matti Kärkainen, Christology a Global Introduction, p. 145.
Hick and Paul F. Knitter, eds., The Myth of Christian Uniqueness: 31 Jacques Dupuis, Toward a Christian Theology of Religious Pluralism,
Toward a Pluralistic Theology of Religions (Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis (Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis Books, 1997) p. 146.
Books, 1988) p. 37.
32 Karl Rahner, “Anonymous Christians,” in Theological Investigations,
17 Terrence Merrigan, “Religious Knowledge in the Pluralist Theology of 6 (Baltimore, MD.: Helicon, 1969) p. 394.
Religions,” p. 687.
33 Karl Rahner, “Anonymous Christianity and the Missionary Task of the
18 Terrence Merrigan, “The Historical Jesus in the pluralist Theology of Church,” Theological Investigations 12 (New York: Seabury Press,
Religions,” p. 65. 1974) p. 166.
19 Maurice Wiles, “In What Sense is Christianity a ‘Historical Religion?,’” 34 For details, see Michael Maladoss, “Is Christ the Unique Saviour? A
Theology81 (1978) p. 12. Clarification of the Question,” Eroll D’Lima, Max Gonsalves (eds.) What
20 Terrence Merrigan, “The Historical Jesus in the pluralist Theology of Does Jesus Christ Mean (Bangalore: Dharmaram, 2001) 7-20.
Religions,” p. 67-68. 35 M.M. Thomas, “………….” Religion and Society12, no. 3 (1965), p. 67.
21 Arul Pragasam, “The God of Religious Pluralism and christology,” T. 36 This title is common in the Christological reflections of P. Chenchaiah
Merrigan and J. Haers (eds.), The Myriad Christ: Plurality and the (1886-1959). For details, see Sunand Sumithra, Christian Theologies
Quest for Unity in Contemporary Christology. Leuven: University from an Indian Perspective (Bangalore: TBT, 1995) p. 122.
Press, 2000, p, 547.
37 This Christological title is used by Swami Abhishiktananda (1910-1973).
22 Arul Pragasam, “The God of Religious Pluralism and christology,” p. See Dupuis, Jesus Christ at the Encounter of World Religions, p. 78.
547.
38 See Brahmabandhav Animananda, The Blade, Life and Works of
23 Gavin D‘Costa, The Meeting of Religions and the Trinity, (Maryknoll, Brahmabandhav Upadhyaya, Culcutta, 1946, p. 68.
N.Y.: Orbis, 2000) p. 22
39 Roberto de Nobili was an Italian Jesuit missionary who arrived in Indian
24 Lesslie Newbigin, The Centrality of Jesus for History, in Michael Goulder in 1605. He studied the Hindu scriptures and the indigenous languages.
(ed.), Incarnation and Myth: The Debate Continued (London: SCM Among his writings, the most significant one is the five volume book
Press, 1979) p. 197. Jnanopadesakam (wise advices) written in Tamil. This is an
25Karl Rahner, Grundkurs des Glaubens, p. 175.See also Joseph interpretation of the teachings of Christ using the indigenous
Pandiappallil, Jesus the Christ and Religious Pluralism, pp.76-77. terminologies.
26 Philip Endean, “Rahner, Christology and Grace,” Heythrop Journal 37 40 See Kavumkal, “Indian Views on the Significance of Jesus Christ,” p.
(1996) 284-297, p. 285. See also, Jerry Farmer, “Four Christological 53.
Themes of the Theology of Karl Rahner,” T. Merrigan and J. Haers 41 Kavumkal, “Indian Views on the Significance of Jesus Christ,” p. 53.
(eds.), The Myriad Christ: Plurality and the Quest for Unity in
Contemporary Christology. Leuven: University Press, 2000, p. 433. 42 As cited in Mathias Mundadan, Emergence of the Catholic Theological
Consciousness (Alwaye: St. Thomas Academy for Research, 1985) p.
27Terrence Merrigan, “Jacques Dupuis and the Redefinition of 5.
Inclusivism,” in Daniel Kendall and Gerald O’Collins, (eds.), In Many
and Diverse Ways: In Honor of Jacques Dupuis (Maryknoll, N. Y.: 43 For a crtical analysis of Sen’s Christology, see Parappally, Emerging
Orbis Books, 2003) p. 62. Trends, pp. 9-17.

174 175
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
44 Complete Works, vol. VII, p. 1. Commenting on this quote, Amaladoss, 65 “The Mystery of the Church”, in Commentary on the Documents of
Asian Jesus. Vatican II, ed. Herbert Vorgrimler (NY/London: Herder and Herder/
45 B. Upadhyaya, “Incarnate Logos” Twentieth Century (1901) p. 7. Burns & Oates, 1967) 150.
46 John N. Farquhar, The Crown of Hinduism (New Delhi: Oriental Books, 66 Richard P. McBrien, “Dominus Iesus: An Ecclesiological Critique,”
1913, repr. 1971). Lecture given at the Centro Pro Unione, Thursday, 11 January 2001.
47 Ratzinger, Truth and Tolerence, p. 122. 67 J. WILLEBRANDS, “Vatican II’s Ecclesiology of Communion”,
48 Jaques Dupuis, Jesus Christ as the Encounter of World Religions Origins 17, 2 (28 May, 1987) 32.
(Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1991) p. 15. 68 Here we disagree with THEOBALD, Die Fleischwerdung, 210; W.H.
49 Joseph Ratzinger, Truth and Tolerance: Christian Belief and World KELBER, Birth of a Beginning; John 1:1-18, in Semeia 52 (1990) 121-
Religions (San Francisco: Ignatius, 2004), p. 119. 144, 131-132, who argue that third beginning in the prologue is the
50 Ratzinger, Truth and Tolerence, p. 122. ministry of John the Baptist. We consider that rather than the ministry
of the Baptist, his emphatic subordination to Jesus is the focus of
51 Paul Wilkes, “Only Catholics Need Apply,” Sunday edition of The attention in the prologue.
Boston Globe (9/10/00) p. 11.
52 Gerard O’Collins,”Watch Your Language” (review of Gavin Costa’s 69 Contrary to this structure, a number of scholars view Jn 1:1-5 also as
The Meeting of Religions and the Trinity), The Tablet (November 4, referring to incarnation. Cf. Du Toit, Marturia, 119; Schnackenburg,
2000) 1490. John, I, 245-246; Theobald, Im Anfang, 50-51. For arguments in favour
of regarding vv. 1-5 as referring to lo,goj avsarko,j, see J.G. Van der
53 Redemptoris Missio No. 5 Watt, The Composition of the Prologue of John’s Gospel: The
54 Collins, watch Your Language, 149. Historical Jesus Introducing Divine Grace, in WTJ 57 (1995) 311-
55 Roger Cardinal Mahony, “Ecumenical and Interreligious Dialogue Will 332.
Continue”, The Tidings (15 September, 2000). 70 Here, “to receive” means “to believe,” because in 1:12, o[soi de. e;labon
56 Donald G. Dowe, “ Christian Faith in a Religiously Plural World,” Donald auvto,n and toi/j pisteu,ousin eivj to. o;noma auvtou/( are used in the
G. Dawe and John B. Carman (eds.), Christian Faith in a Religiously parallel sense. Cf. MOLONEY, Belief in the Word, 38-39..
Plural World (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1978), 13-32. For the above abstract 71 BULTMANN, John, 56, n. 1, argues that the neuter plural ta. i[dia does
and evaluation of this study, see Seshairi Rao, “The Value of Religious
Pluralism,” p. 54 not have any reference to the Jews or Israel. But as CARSON, John, 124,
points out, the masculine oi[ i[dioi in the same verse weakens Bultmann’s
57Quoted in M. M. Thomas, The Acknowledged Ct of the Indian argument and signifies a clear link to the Jews. See also, D. J. MACLEOD,
Renaissance (Madras: Christ Literature Society, 1970) p. 9 and in The Reaction of the World to the Word: John 1:10-13, in BS 160/640
Amaladoss, The Asian Jesus, 27. (2003) 398-413, 401. J. W. PRYOR, Jesus and the Israel in the Fourth
58 Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi, The Message of Jesus ct (Bombay: Gospel, in NovT 32 (1990) 202-218, argues that oi[ i[dioi represents the
1940), p. 35, cited in Amaldoss, Asian Jesus, p. 30. Jesus’ country men, that is, the Jewish people of Jesus time, not the
59 Amalorpavadass, Indian Church in the Struggle for a New Society, p. covenantal community of the OT. Though Pryor’s argument is
75. convincing, it becomes difficult to understand the distinction which
60 M. M. Thomas, “A Christ-Centered Humanist Approach to Other he makes from the covenantal community and the Jewish people of
Religions in the Indian Pluralistic Context,” Gavin D’Costa (ed.), Myth Jesus’ own time, who earnestly claimed to be the covenantal community.
of Christian Uniqueness Reconsidered (Marknoll, NY: 2003) 49-63. .
61 M.M. Thomas, Salvation and Humanization (Madras: Christian 72 MORRIS, John, 86; MACLEOD, The Reaction of the World, 404, argue that
Institute, 1971). the verb pare,labon is usually used to denote the warm welcome that a
62 Paul Wilkes, in The Boston Globe person receives from his family members (cf. Mat 1:20,24; Jn 14:3).
63 Francis Sullivan, in Boston Globe: 12 September, 2000 The evangelist thus intensifies the gravity of the rejection by his own
people.
64 Mystici corporis Christi, n. 14, and Humani generis,n.
73 MILNE, The Message of John, 45, points out that the evangelist’s
44.Pius XII had actually use the term “Roman” Catholic Church. reference to evxousi,a to become members in the family of God becomes

176 177
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
more striking in the Palestinian Jewish context where the majority of
people were under slavery. See also, BOICE, John, I, 94. Bibliography
74 Paul uses uivoi. qeou/ to designate those who are led by the Spirit (Rom
8:14; cf. 9:24; Gal 4:6), and those who have faith in Jesus (Gal 3:26).
75 Cf. WUNT/149/2. Allen J.L., Cardinal Ratzinger (New York: Continuum, 2000).
Altizer T.J , The Gospel of Christian Atheism (The Westminster Press,
76 Cf. H.C. Waetjen, Logos pro,j to.n qeo,n, 280. 1966); T J Altizer and W Hamilton, Radical Theology and the
77 We disregard other suggestions. Death of God; S N Gundry and A F Johnson, eds., Tensions in
78 POLYCARP Letter to the Philippians, 7.1-2, makes this distinction. For Contemporary Theology; K Hamilton, God Is Dead: The Anatomy
details, see KELBER, Birth of a Beginning, 124-126. of a Slogan; P.M van Buren, “Christian Education Post Mortem
Dei”
79 Edward Schillebeeckx, Church: The Human Story of God, (London: Animananda Brahmabandhav, The Blade, Life and Works of
SCM, 1990), 167.
Brahmabandhav Upadhyaya, Culcutta, 1946, p. 68.
80 The failure to emphasise this tension and opting one for the other can Augustine, On Christian Doctrine, preface 9.18. All quotations from On
result in naïve docetism as argued by Käsemann,Testament of Jesus, Christian Doctrine are taken from Saint Augustine, On Christian
73. Teaching, trans. R.P.H. Green (Oxford: Oxford University Press,
81 M. Coloe,The Structure of the Johannine Prologue and Genesis 1, in 1997).
ABR(1997) 40-55, proposes the thesis that the structure of the prologue Barr James, Semantics of Biblical Language.
is formulated after the paradigm of the first creation account in Gen 1:1- Barthes Roland, The Death of the Author, trans. Richard Miller (New York:
2:4a. Hill and Wang, 1974).
82 D. TOVEY, Narrative Strategies in the Prologue and the Metaphor of Betti Emilio, Allgemeine Auslegungslehre als Methodik der
o‘ lo,goj in John’s Gospel, in Pacifica 15 (2002) 138-151, argues that Geistenswissenschaften (Tubingen: J. C. B. Mohr, I967).
the use of o‘ lo,goj in the prologue and in the rest of the gospel (6:60; Biemer Gunter, Newman on Tradition (London: Burns & Oates, 1967).
7:36; 8:37; 10:35; 12:48; 17:17) functions as a narrative metaphor of Black Stephanie L., “Augustine’s Hermeneutics: Back to the Future for
“implicative dynamics” that discloses the identification of the lo,goj ‘Spiritual’ Bible Interpretation?” African Journal of Evangelical
with Jesus. Theology 27/1 (2008).
Blondel Maurice, The Letter on Apologetics, and History and Dogma,
83 Cf. S.W. Need, Re-Reading the Prologue: Incarnation and Creation presented and translated by Alexander Dru and I. Trethowan
in John 1.1-18, 404. However, interpretation of oi‘ i[dioi as the entire (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1965).
cosmos is not convincing. Boeve Lieven, “Revelation, Scripture and Tradition: Lessons from Vatican
84 For similar view, see E. Klootwijk, Commitment and Openness, 327. II’s Constitution Dei verbum for Contemporary Theology,”
85 Cf. H.C. Waetjen, Logos pro,j to.n qeo,n and the Objectification of Truth International Journal of Systematic Theology 13 ( 2011)..
in the Prologue of the Fourth gospel, in CBQ 61 (2001) 265-286,279. Bomann Thorleif, Hebrew Thought Compared With Greek (New York:
86 J. Hick, Trinity and Incarnation in the Light of Religious Pluralism, in Norton, 1970).
BOTHA J. E., Reader Entrapment as Literary Device in John 4:1-42, in
Id. & E.S. Meltzer (eds.), Albany, NY, State University, 204. Neotestamentica, 24 (1990).
Braaten Carl E., New Directions in Theology Today, vol. 2, History and
Hermeneutics, gen. ed. William Hordern (Philadelphia:
Westminster Press, 1966).
Bray Gerald, Biblical Interpretation: Past and Present (Downers Grove,
IL: Intervarsity Press, 1996).
Bruce F.F., “Biblical Exegesis and Hermeneutics,” The New Encyclopedia
Britannica, 1977.
Bultmann Rudolf, Jesus Christ and Mythology (New York: Charles Scribner’s
Sons, 1958).
Burigana R., La bibbia nel concilio. La redazione della costituizione ‘Dei
verbum’ del Vaticano II (Bologna: Il Mulino, 1998), pp. 110–14;

178 179
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
G. Alberigo and J.A. Komonchak, History of Vatican II, vol. 2 Unity in Contemporary Christology. Leuven: University Press,
(Leuven: Peeters, 1997), pp. 69–93, 233–66; the contribution of 2000.
Helmut Hoping on Dei verbum in P. Hünermann & J. Hilberath, Ernesti, Institutio interpretis Novi Testamenti, 8; Saussure, Cours de
eds., Herders Theologischer Kommentar zum Zweiten Linguistique General.
Vatikanischen Konzil, vol. 3 (Freiburg: Herder, 2005). Farquhar John N., The Crown of Hinduism (New Delhi: Oriental Books,
Cahill M., “‘Reader-response criticism and the allegorizing 1913, repr. 1971).
reader’”. Theological Studies.57/1(1196). Firestone R.S, “The Epistemological Double Standard Inherent in Christian
Carasik Michael, Theologies of Mind in Biblical Israel SBL -85 (Atlanta, Metaphysical Beliefs,” Open Journal of Philosophy 4 (2014).
SBL, 2008) and Yael Avrahami, The Senses of scripture: Sensory Fleteren Frederick Van, ‘Principles of Augustine’s Hermeneutic: An
Perception in the Hebrew Bible (Bloomsbury: T&T Clark, 2011) Overview,’ in Frederick Van Fleteren and Joseph C. Schnaubelt
argue for the centrality of sight in Hebrew epistemology. (eds.), Augustine: Biblical Exegete (New York: Peter Lang, 2001).
Cardinal Mahony Roger, “Ecumenical and Interreligious Dialogue Will Franklin Johnson John, “Hermeneutics in Thomas Aquinas: An Appraisal
Continue”, The Tidings (15 September, 2000). and Appreciation,” Concordia Theological Quarterly 45/3 (1981)
Collins Gerald O’, “Criteria for Interpreting the Traditions,” in Problems 223-232, 225.
and Perspectives of Fundamental Theology, edited by Rene Froehlich Karlfried, “‘Take Up and Read”: Basics of Augustine’s Biblical
Latourelle and Gerald O’Collins (New York: Paulist Press, 1982). Interpretation,’ Interpretation 58/ I (2004).
Collins Gerard O’,”Watch Your Language” (review of Gavin Costa’s The Gadamer Hans-Georg, Truth and Method, Philosophical Hermeneutics
Meeting of Religions and the Trinity), The Tablet (November 4, (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, I976);
2000) 1490. Grillmeier Alois, “The Divine Inspiration and the Interpretation of Sacred
Coloe M., The Structure of the Johannine Prologue and Genesis 1, in Scripture,” in Commentary on the Documents of Vatican II, ed.
ABR(1997) 40-55, proposes the thesis that the structure of the Herbert Vorgrimler, 5 vols. (New York: Herder and Herder, 1969),
prologue is formulated after the paradigm of the first creation 3:199–246, at 245.
account in Gen 1:1-2:4a. Guthrie W.K.C., History of Greek Philosophy (Cambridge: Cambridge
Cone Cristopher, “Epistemological Foundations for a Biblical Theology,” University Press, 1965).
Presented to the Chafer Theological Seminary Conference, Guzie Tad W., “Patristic Hermeneutics and the Meaning of Tradition,”
March 12, 2014. (www.drcone.com). Theological Studies 25 (1994) 647.
Congar Yves, Tradition and Traditions: A Historical and Theological Essay, Hamel Gildas, “Seeing and hearing in the Bible,”
translated by M. Naseby and T. Rainborough (New York: HANGER D. A., The Vision of God in Philo and John, in JETS 14 (1971) 8194.
Macmillan, 1967), 189-221. Hick John,God Has Many Names (London: Macmillan, 1980).
Crawford Edward and Daniel Ghormley, “Biblical Epistemology,” WRS Hock Siew Lee, Christianity and The Postmodern Turn: Critique of
Journal 6/2 (1999). Postmodern Epistemology (South African Theological Seminary,
D‘Costa Gavin, The Meeting of Religions and the Trinity, (Maryknoll, 2009).
N.Y.: Orbis, 2000). Howe Bonnie, Joel B. Green (eds.), Cognitive Linguistic Explorations in
Dowe Donald G., “ Christian Faith in a Religiously Plural World,” Donald Biblical Studies (Boston: Walter de Gruyter, 2014) .
G. Dawe and John B. Carman (eds.), Christian Faith in a Iammarino-Falhamer Denna, “Hermeneutics, Poetry, and Spenser:
Religiously Plural World (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1978), 13-32. Augustinian Exegesis and the Renaissance Epic” (2011).
For the above abstract and evaluation of this study, see Seshairi Ignoramous Lamos, The Death of The Author: Roland Barthes and The
Rao, “The Value of Religious Pluralism.” Collapse of Meaning, 2017.
Dulles Avery, “Vatican II on the Interpretation of Scripture,” Letter & Spirit John D. Caputo, More Radical Hermeneutics: On Not Knowing Who We
2 (2006). Are (Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press,
Dupuis Jacques, Toward a Christian Theology of Religious Pluralism, 2000).
(Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis Books, 1997). Jonathan Sacks Rabbi, “re’eh – Seeing and Hearing,” Covenant and
Endean Philip, “Rahner, Christology and Grace,” Heythrop Journal 37 (1996) Conversation (London: SCM, 2008).
284-297, p. 285. See also, Jerry Farmer, “Four Christological Jones R., Reductionism (London: Associated University Press, 2000).
Themes of the Theology of Karl Rahner,” T. Merrigan and J. Karamchand Gandhi Mohandas, The Message of Jesus ct (Bombay: 1940),
Haers (eds.), The Myriad Christ: Plurality and the Quest for p. 35, cited in Amaldoss, Asian Jesus, p. 30.

180 181
Audio, Ergo Sum Audio, Ergo Sum
Kärkainen Veli-Matti, Pneumatology: The Holy Spirit in Ecumenical, Need S.W., Re-Reading the Prologue: Incarnation and Creation in John
International, and Contextual Perspective (Grand Rapids, MI: 1.1-18, 404. However, interpretation of oi‘ i[dioi as the entire
Baker, 2002) p. 116. See also Veli-Matti Kärkainen, Christology cosmos is not convincing.
a Global Introduction (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 2003). Newbigin Lesslie, The Centrality of Jesus for History, in Michael Goulder
KASPER W., “Relating Christ’s Universality to Interreligious Dialogue”, (ed.), Incarnation and Myth: The Debate Continued (London:
Origins 30, 21 (2 November, 2000). SCM Press, 1979.
Kavumkal, “Indian Views on the Significance of Jesus Christ.” NIEL J. O, The Experience of Error: Ironic Entrapment in Augastan Narrative
Kelsey David H., The Uses of Scripture in Recent Theology (Philadelphia: Structure,in PLL 18 (1982).
Fortress, 1975). Paglia Camille, Sexual Personae: Art and Decadence from Nefertiti to Emily
Küng Hans, “The World Religions in God’s Plan of Salvation,” in Joseph Dickson (New York: Vintage, 1990).
Neuner, ed.Christian Revelation and World Religions(London: Panikkar Raimundo, The Trinity and the Religious Experience.
Burns & Oates, 1967). Patton Michael, In Defense of Sola Scriptura (New York: Mind Ministry,
Kung Hans, Restitution of the True Doctrine of God and Christ. 2009).
KYSAR R., Johannine Metaphor - Meaning and Function: A Literary Case PLATO, Parmenides, Cambridge, MS, Harvard University, 1987, § 132d, §141d.
Study of John 10:1-8, in Semeia 53 (1991) 81-111. Pope Benedict XVI, Homily at Mass of Possession of the Chair of the Bishop
Lee, Christianity and The Postmodern Turn. of Rome (May 7, 2005), in Origins 35 (May 26, 2005): 26–28, at 28
Mackey James P., The Modern Theology of Tradition (New York: Herder Pragasam Arul, “The God of Religious Pluralism and christology,” T.
and Herder, 1963). Merrigan and J. Haers (eds.), The Myriad Christ: Plurality and
Maladoss Michael, “Is Christ the Unique Saviour? A Clarification of the the Quest for Unity in Contemporary Christology. Leuven:
Question,” Eroll D’Lima, Max Gonsalves (eds.) What Does Jesus University Press, 2000.
Christ Mean (Bangalore: Dharmaram, 2001). Rahner Karl, “Anonymous Christianity and the Missionary Task of the
McBrien Richard P., “Dominus Iesus: An Ecclesiological Critique,” Lecture Church,” Theological Investigations 12 (New York: Seabury
given at the Centro Pro Unione, Thursday, 11 January 2001. Press, 1974).
McQuilkin R., Understanding and Applying the Bible. Ratzinger J., ‘Bilanz der Nachkonzilszeit – Misserfolge, Aufgaben,
Merrigan Terrence “Religious Knowledge in the Pluralist Theology of Hoffnungen’, in J. Ratzinger, Theologische Prinzipienlehre:
Religions,” p. 687. He refers to L. Gilkey as an example of this Bausteine zur Fundamentaltheologie (Münich: Wewel, 1982).
position: Langdon Gilkey, “Plurality and its Theological Ricoeur Paul, Interpretation Theory (Fort Worth, TX: Texas Christian
Implications,” in John Hick and Paul F. Knitter, eds., The Myth of University Press, 1976).
Christian Uniqueness: Toward a Pluralistic Theology of Rush Ormond, “Toward a Comprehensive Interpretation of the Council and
Religions (Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis Books, 1988). Its Documents,” in Theological Studies 73:3 (2012).
MILNE, The Message of John, 45, points out that the evangelist’s reference Samartha Stanley, “The Cross and the Rainbow,” John Hick and Paul Knitter
to evxousi,a to become members in the family of God becomes (eds.), The Myth of Christian Uniqueness(New York: Orbis, 1987)
more striking in the Palestinian Jewish context where the majority 69-88.
of people were under slavery. See also, BOICE, John, I. Schelkens K., Catholic Theology of Revelation on the Eve of Vatican II: A
Möhler Johann, Unity in the Church, edited and translated by Peter C. Erb Redaction History of the Schema De fontibus revelationis (1960–
(Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America Press, 1996). 62) (Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2010.
MORRIS, John, 86; MACLEOD, The Reaction of the World, 404, argue that the Schillebeeckx Edward, Church: The Human Story of God, (London: SCM,
verb pare,labon is usually used to denote the warm welcome that 1990).
a person receives from his family members (cf. Mat 1:20,24; Jn Schleiermacher Friedrich, On Religion trans. John Oman (New York: Harper
14:3). The evangelist thus intensifies the gravity of the rejection Torchbooks, 1958).
by his own people. Siew Lee Hock, Christianity And The Postmodern Turn A Critique Of
Mundadan Mathias, Emergence of the Catholic Theological Consciousness Postmodern Epistemology (The South African Theological
(Alwaye: St. Thomas Academy for Research, 1985). Seminary: SATSP, 2009).
Nassif Bradley, “The ‘Spiritual Exegesis’ of Scripture: The School of Antioch Simonetti Manlino, Biblical Interpretation in the Early Church: An
Revisited,” Anglican Theological Review 75 (2013). Historical Introduction to Patristic Exegesis, trans. John A
Hughes and ed. Anders Bergquist and Markus Bockmuehl
(Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1994), 67. 4 Laurie Ann Pinkert,

182 183
Audio, Ergo Sum
Antiochene Methods of Interpretation (Boiling Springs, North
Carolina: Gardner-Webb University, 2012).
Sullivan Francis, in Boston Globe: 12 September, 2000
Theodore of Mopsuestia, Commentary of the Epistles of St Paul. Latin
Version with Greek Fragments, vol. 1, edited by H.B. Swete, 11880,
21969.
Thomas M. M., “A Christ-Centered Humanist Approach to Other Religions
in the Indian Pluralistic Context,” Gavin D’Costa (ed.), Myth of
Christian Uniqueness Reconsidered (Marknoll, NY: 2003).
Thorleif Bomann, Hebrew Thought Compared With Greek (New York:
Norton, 1970).
Tong Stephen, “Bultmann’s Demythologization and Lonergan’s Method,”
Theology Annual 24 (2003).
TOVEY D., Narrative Strategies in the Prologue and the Metaphor of o‘
lo,goj in John’s Gospel, in Pacifica 15 (2002) 138-151, argues that
the use of o‘ lo,goj in the prologue and in the rest of the gospel
(6:60; 7:36; 8:37; 10:35; 12:48; 17:17) functions as a narrative
metaphor of “implicative dynamics” that discloses the
identification of the lo,goj with Jesus.
Tran Tan, The Development of Tradition: Dei Verbum and a Scientific
Practical Theology of Tradition (Boston: Boston University,
2012.
Tyson L., Critical theory today: a user-friendly guide©, 2nd edn (Routledge:
New York and London, 2006.
Upadhyaya B., “Incarnate Logos” Twentieth Century (1901).
Vanhoozer K., Cambridge Companion to Postmodern Theology (Cambridge
:CUP, 2005).
Vignaux Paul, Philosophy in the Middle Ages(New York: Harpper, 1959),
119.
Waetjen H.C., Logos pro,j to.n qeo,n and the Objectification of Truth in the
Prologue of the Fourth gospel, in CBQ 61 (2001).
Wicks Jared “Vatican II on Revelation – From Behind the Scenes,”
Theological Studies 71 (2010).
Wiles Maurice, “In What Sense is Christianity a ‘Historical Religion?,’”
Theology81 (1978).
Wilkes Paul, “Only Catholics Need Apply,” Sunday edition of The Boston
Globe (9/10/00).
WILLEBRANDS J., “Vatican II’s Ecclesiology of Communion”, Origins
17, 2 (28 May, 1987).
Witherup Ronald D., The Word of God at Vatican II: Exploring Dei Verbum
(Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 2014).
Wittgenstein Ludwig, Philosophical Investigations, edited by G. M.
Anscombe (Oxford: Blackwell, 1953), §373.
Wm. McClendon James Jr., Systematic Theology, vol. 2 (Nashville: Abingdon
Press, 1994).
WRIGHT P. WHEEL, p. 116; CHATELION COUNET, Postmodern Gospel.
Young Frances, The Westminster Dictionary of Christian Theology, 1983.

184