What do you think?
Rate this book
Catholic Commentary on Sacred Scripture
Pierwszy i Drugi List do Tymoteusza, List do Tytusa
„Ponieważ listy pasterskie dotyczą wskazań dawanych przez jednego pasterza, Pawła, drugiemu, Tymoteuszowi albo Tytusowi, świeccy mogą myśleć, że nie ma tu wiele strawy dla ich duchowości. Tak nie jest. To prawda, że Paweł mówi w tych listach o biskupach, prezbiterach i diakonach, jest tu jednak całe bogactwo nauki, duchowości i zdrowego rozsądku, który może nakarmić każdego. Szczególnie ci, którzy są zaangażowani w jakikolwiek rodzaj służby w Kościele, znajdą w tych listach wiele inspiracji i praktycznych wskazówek”.
320 pages, Paperback
First published October 16, 2008
17 people are currently reading
45 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews
August 28, 2025
Although this commentary provides some useful information about the Pastoral Epistles, it didn’t really engage with some of the (arguably) most serious issues which the documents raise for modern Christians.
One set of serious issues involve the authorship of the documents. The book recognises disputes about authorship but nevertheless preferred to view the historic St Paul as the author. That is indeed a possible position which can be argued (albeit a minority one), but it does raise additional questions which need addressing.
For example, why does Marcion (d. 160?) not mention these documents. The book’s introduction takes the view that it was because Marcion disagreed with the theology in them. However, Marcion is thought to have ‘edited’ other biblical texts to remove what he took as wrong material which he claimed had been inserted into them. So, presumably he could have edited the Pastorals… if he was aware of them. This raises the question of whether Marcion was perhaps not aware of the Pastorals because they were written much later than could be possible by the historic St Paul? Ideally, a commentary on the Pastorals needs to explicitly engage with questions like that?
The introduction also asserts that even if the Pastorals were written by someone other than Paul, then they ‘were not aiming at deception.’ On the contrary, they represent a kind of morally-good deception (which the author calls allonymity). But how does the author know that to be the case? Is that faith talking, or is there some kind of historical evidence to justify that kind of view?
Other scholars (such as Bart Ehrman) have claimed that the ancient world viewed deceptive attributions to documents just as negatively as the modern world does. So, he claims, the idea of a positive allonymity is simply contrary to evidence. This means that if the epistles were not written by Paul then they are forged, deceptive documents? Would it matter to Christians if their Scriptures contained ‘forged’ documents which deceptively misrepresent their authorship? In the context of the Pastorals that is a very real question. Yet once again it is not probed very adequately.
In regard to the theologial issues raised by these epistles, questions about the role of women are particularly significant.
One set of issues revolves around Paul’s view that women should only become registered ‘widows’ (eligible for Church support) if they are over the age of 60, and if they have been married once. He recommends that younger widows should re-marry. But if all the young women re-married, then (in due course) that would mean that there were no women who would meet his criteria of being ‘only married once’ when they reached the age of 60. That would deprive those re-married widows of Church financial support. It seems unfair to hold a second marriage against widows, if Paul (and Timothy) have actually encouraged them to re-marry. So, there is a question here about fairness, which the commentary does not engage with.
Perhaps the most serious issue, however, is Paul’s view in 1 Timothy 2, where he asserts that women should not have any authority over men. What makes that text a particularly serious issue is that it cannot be dismissed as just a cultural assumption of the author. This is because the author gives an argument based upon an interpretation of Scripture (ie Eve’s sin in the book of Genesis). So, at first glance the text seems to be (a divinely inspired) teaching of a doctrine about women, which is based on a Scriptural interpretation. Can Christians simply dismiss or ignore a text like that, as if the (divinely inspired) author has used Scripture wrongly or incompletely? Or is there some other way that modern Scriptures should engage with texts like this? The commentary does not engage with this issue in a very thorough way.
Overall, I was disappointed in this book. It is a perfectly readable book which should be accessible to almost any reader. But it just does not deal with the ‘difficult’ questions which these Scriptural texts raise for modern Christians.
One set of serious issues involve the authorship of the documents. The book recognises disputes about authorship but nevertheless preferred to view the historic St Paul as the author. That is indeed a possible position which can be argued (albeit a minority one), but it does raise additional questions which need addressing.
For example, why does Marcion (d. 160?) not mention these documents. The book’s introduction takes the view that it was because Marcion disagreed with the theology in them. However, Marcion is thought to have ‘edited’ other biblical texts to remove what he took as wrong material which he claimed had been inserted into them. So, presumably he could have edited the Pastorals… if he was aware of them. This raises the question of whether Marcion was perhaps not aware of the Pastorals because they were written much later than could be possible by the historic St Paul? Ideally, a commentary on the Pastorals needs to explicitly engage with questions like that?
The introduction also asserts that even if the Pastorals were written by someone other than Paul, then they ‘were not aiming at deception.’ On the contrary, they represent a kind of morally-good deception (which the author calls allonymity). But how does the author know that to be the case? Is that faith talking, or is there some kind of historical evidence to justify that kind of view?
Other scholars (such as Bart Ehrman) have claimed that the ancient world viewed deceptive attributions to documents just as negatively as the modern world does. So, he claims, the idea of a positive allonymity is simply contrary to evidence. This means that if the epistles were not written by Paul then they are forged, deceptive documents? Would it matter to Christians if their Scriptures contained ‘forged’ documents which deceptively misrepresent their authorship? In the context of the Pastorals that is a very real question. Yet once again it is not probed very adequately.
In regard to the theologial issues raised by these epistles, questions about the role of women are particularly significant.
One set of issues revolves around Paul’s view that women should only become registered ‘widows’ (eligible for Church support) if they are over the age of 60, and if they have been married once. He recommends that younger widows should re-marry. But if all the young women re-married, then (in due course) that would mean that there were no women who would meet his criteria of being ‘only married once’ when they reached the age of 60. That would deprive those re-married widows of Church financial support. It seems unfair to hold a second marriage against widows, if Paul (and Timothy) have actually encouraged them to re-marry. So, there is a question here about fairness, which the commentary does not engage with.
Perhaps the most serious issue, however, is Paul’s view in 1 Timothy 2, where he asserts that women should not have any authority over men. What makes that text a particularly serious issue is that it cannot be dismissed as just a cultural assumption of the author. This is because the author gives an argument based upon an interpretation of Scripture (ie Eve’s sin in the book of Genesis). So, at first glance the text seems to be (a divinely inspired) teaching of a doctrine about women, which is based on a Scriptural interpretation. Can Christians simply dismiss or ignore a text like that, as if the (divinely inspired) author has used Scripture wrongly or incompletely? Or is there some other way that modern Scriptures should engage with texts like this? The commentary does not engage with this issue in a very thorough way.
Overall, I was disappointed in this book. It is a perfectly readable book which should be accessible to almost any reader. But it just does not deal with the ‘difficult’ questions which these Scriptural texts raise for modern Christians.
September 1, 2018
This was a very strange read. Still better than liberal protestantism tbh. He writes with mild use of historical context while still holding well enough to the readings of the historic church. The author, however, does not go in depth on any concepts. If you are looking to really understand how catholics look at these texts specifically this is not the volume for you, but if you are looking to see how catholics read scripture this may be it.
December 12, 2019
Compared to other volumes in the series, this is a little more chatty in tone, with lots of anecdotes from the author's ministry. I didn't feel that these added anything and would have preferred more detail on some of the difficult passages in the Pastorals instead. The treatment of the notorious "saved through childbearing" passage felt particularly unsatisfying. Overall, though, it was an interesting read. I particularly liked the author's arguments for Pauline authorship of these letters.
March 27, 2019
This is an excellent source to get a feel for Paul 's directives to the bishops of the time.
This is an excellent source to get a feel for ,'s directives to the bishops of the time.
Great read.
This is an excellent source to get a feel for ,'s directives to the bishops of the time.
Great read.
March 1, 2020
Letters from the Apostle Paul
I love reading commentaries and learning more about the Bible. I'm thankful that there are people who can help me and others learn the meaning and explain in a way that I can understand. Thanks.
I love reading commentaries and learning more about the Bible. I'm thankful that there are people who can help me and others learn the meaning and explain in a way that I can understand. Thanks.
August 11, 2019
I've read fifteen of the projected 17 volumes in this series and highly recommend them.
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews