Making Senses out of Scripture

Written by Mark Shea

(Basilica Press, 2004)

Reviewed by Colin Kerr

shea

I am sorry to say that I did not like this book. I have been meaning to read it for a few years, but was quite disappointed after having finally done so.

Why? It is way too simplistic. Of course, there is a large readership for the sort of elementary catechesis and apologetics that people like Shea produce, but I have to wonder why it has to be so simplistic. This book was written for someone with a high school level of knowledge of the Faith. Most of what it says is good and true, but I have to wonder what kind of high schooler would want to know about the ‘Senses of Scripture’? What adult, on the other hand, would not find in this book a whole lot of elementary catechesis to wade through before finally getting to what the title seemed to imply: an explanation of the ‘Senses of Scripture’? That begins at page 159 in a book 263 pages long!

It starts off compellingly. Shea introduces his own experience in coming to understand what the Scripture really teach us. And yet, is not this personalism just a bit too much sometimes? It is so bloggery. Yes, I am being a bit hypocritical here. Nevertheless, a textbook on Scripture—and yes, this book is a lot like a textbook—should be more formal, should it not?

On the plus side, although he has little formal theological training, Shea has a very broad understanding of the Faith, which he is able to draw on in terms of excellently timed quotes and historical reflections.

But in a nutshell, no one ever needs to go simpler than Scott Hahn when it comes to pop scriptural theology, and this book does.

Medieval Exegesis: The Four Senses of Scripture

Written by Henri De Lubac

(Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1998, 2000, 2009), pp. 489, 453, 800.

Reviewed by Colin Kerr

med

You will never know the Bible as the Church knows the Bible until you understand it according to the Four Senses.

Imagine reading a book on how people in the Middle Ages (c. 500-1500 AD) interpreted the Bible. And then imagine doing so over three volumes, for a collective 1742 pages!

The essential question here is, why would anyone want to do either of these things?

Why should I care about how Medieval people interpreted the Bible? Most Catholics might not know how to answer this question with any degree of confidence, but of course we all know that we are supposed to “give a nod to tradition,” for some reason or other. There are at least two ways to answer this question:

1) according to the general sense – that the Bible is an endlessly rich document and we can profit from engaging with it anywhere and everywhere.

2) according to the specific sense – in this sense we are not interested in what Medieval people thought of the Bible, we are interested in what the Church officially teaches about the Bible, and this includes the popes, bishops and theologians of the Middle Ages.

I would read this book for both of these reasons. The subject of the Church’s interpretation of the Bible occupied two of my graduate theses. In each case I focused on a particular aspect of St. Augustine’s thought. In some ways we can say that Augustine’s thought created Medieval theology, so for me the study of Medieval exegesis is like looking at the shock waves created by my great hero. But, of course, Augustine inherited his view (as did Gregory the Great, Jerome and Ambrose) from the great Egyptian Christian, Origen. This book has plenty to say about him.

I got into the topic because I could not and would not believe that the true Church of God would teach stuff like that world was actually created in six days. It doesn’t; it didn’t. But since that initial start I have been committed to reading the exegetical works of the great masters mainly because they are spiritually nourishing (unlike many contemporary works of biblical scholarship).

But do you have to do this over 1700 pages? No, of course not. In fact, de Lubac didn’t have to do this either. He also wrote a short and most useful, Scripture in the Tradition in 268 pages (The Crossroad Publishing Company, 2001), which perhaps I’ll review later. But this is an unparalleled and seminal study, still heavily referenced by scholars, even though it was originally written in 1959.

Frankly, no one before De Lubac knew the topic as well as he did. That is probably still true today. If you have read anything by this Jesuit scholar whom St. John Paul raised to the cardinalate late in his life, you know that he was massively erudite. His books are all punctuated by an excess of learning, if there is such a thing, and excess of references to Ancient and Medieval writers.

Over the three volumes of Medieval Exegesis, De Lubac traces the origin (first volume), provides comprehensive definitions (second volume) and use of the so-called “four senses of Scripture,” flowering in the great thinkers he treats in the third volume, people such as Hugh as St. Victor and Joachim of Flora (aka Fiora).

The four senses are the literal, allegorical, tropological and anagogical. The first is kind of obvious (but, technically speaking, the most complicated of the four!). Allegory is when something basically tells a story that is really about Christ, like Abraham’s sacrifice of Isaac. Tropological is the moral sense: what are we supposed to learn from Daniel and the lion’s den. Anagogical is the ‘final’ sense, basically any meaning that refers to the world to come, judgement, heaven, hell, etc.

De Lubac’s book has been thought of as having created a revolution in Catholic scriptural interpretation, the kind of revolution that is best defined in relation to the ‘theological school’ to which he, Ratzinger, von Balthasar and others have been associated with: the ‘Ressourcement School,’ which sought to return to a fuller sense of the theological tradition, away from narrow Thomism, on the one hand, and liberalism with its faithless kind of historical-critical interpretation of the Bible, on the other. There are many signs of this revolution as having taken place, but as someone who keeps a keen eye on what impact Patristics (the study of the Fathers of the Church) is having on the contemporary Church, I would say that a revolution has yet to really begin. If you look at places like the John Paul II Institute in Washington and the Augustine Institute in Denver, there are some signs that a return to the sources is occurring, but I think it has not made a permanent place for itself yet. I still see seminary and other theological schools sadly neglecting the fuller tradition.

Anyway, back to the book. It is a masterpiece. There could be no more comprehensive treatment of the topic, and, as I have argued, it is an important one over which to gain comprehension.

I will review some other books that purport to present ‘the Catholic’ understanding of scripture. There will be some winners and some losers. All of the winners will have gained a great deal from Medieval Exegesis.

 

Mary Through the Centuries: Her Place in the History of Culture

Written by Jaroslav Pelikan

(Yale University Press, 1998), 288 pp.

Reviewed by Colin Kerr

mary

A follow-up to his excellent and useful book, Jesus through the Centuries (reviewed on this site, and originally published in 1985). This book is perhaps even more useful, since there are so few that accomplish what this book does.

The importance of a work like this one lies in the fact that – even more than in the case of the Lord – the subject of Mary has seemed to invite very little historical acumen. It seems like there are Mariologist and then there are historians, and ne’re the twain shall meet. The only other decent book on the subject that I know of and that is widely available is Mary and the Fathers of the Church by Luigi Gombero. I have read a number of theological tracts on Mary that are good theology, but that’s systematics, and I am speaking about history here. History and Mary haven’t mixed well because it is a subject that has been dominated by devotion, and that of a certain kind. Perhaps it’s also fair to say that, again, relative to the Lord, we know even that much less about her as an historical person.

Of course, this isn’t a book about Mary herself – in a way only the first chapter comes close to qualifying as that, entitled, “Miriam of Nazareth in the New Testament.” This is a book about her significance in Christian thought over the centuries.

One complaint. It’s about Pelikan’s writing style. It’s sometimes annoyingly vague and overly-reliant on quotes rather than incisive conclusions. Yes, I know why he does it: because impressions are a legitimate means of teaching, and not everything is reducible to pithy statements. But I am happy for the ones he does provide: little did he realize, it seems, that this is what readers need most of all, pivot-points for orienting us around the long and complicated story of Christian history. Readers need things like, “This was the first time such and such was said or happened.”

What set the thought and devotion of this period [12th to 13th Centuries] apart from what preceded it was the growing emphasis on the office of Mary as Mediatrix. The title itself seems to have appeared first in Eastern theology… (p. 130)

The sort of vagueness that I dislike is apparent in his abiding of that trend in academic writing of employing vague chapter headings that fail to inform you  of what the chapter is about. Very often to determine this you have to either read the whole chapter or – a quicker way – look at the end notes. For instance, by looking at the end notes you can determine that Chapter 10, entitled “The Face That Most resembles Christ’s,” is about Dante, and that Chapter 12, “The Mater Gloriosa and the Eternal Feminine,” is about Goethe.

To me, the most interesting chapters were 11, 13, and 14, devoted, respectively, to Protestantism, private revelations of Mary (Guadalupe, Lourdes and Fatima), and views of the Immaculate Conception (especially the views of Bernard, Aquinas and Scotus).

This is an essential book for people caught in a single-sourced, a-historical view of the Blessed Virgin, the most important woman who has ever lived.