Catholic Thought discussion

Introduction.

What is Dei Verbum? Translated in means “the Word of God” and it is taken from the opening phrase of the document. It refers to itself as the “Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation.” It was the very first document put out by the Second Vatican Council, and it is dated, November 18, 1965, promulgated by his holiness, Pope Paul VI. You can read the document online, here. https://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_c...

In the preface we are given the objective of the document:

Therefore, following in the footsteps of the Council of Trent and of the First Vatican Council, this present council wishes to set forth authentic doctrine on divine revelation and how it is handed on, so that by hearing the message of salvation the whole world may believe, by believing it may hope, and by hoping it may love. (Preface, Paragraph 1)

In layman’s terms, the objective is to put forth the doctrine of how the Catholic Church has received divine revelation and how it communicates that revelation to the faithful. The second part of that quoted sentence tells us why the Church communicates: so that the whole world may believe. I emphasized “whole world” because that is more than just the Catholic Church. It does so I believe because the Catholic Church as the institution created by Jesus through Peter sees herself as having the responsibility of maintaining the faith for all, whether they consider themselves as part of the Catholic Church or not.

You can read a history and summary of Dei Verbum at Wikipedia, here. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dei_verbum

Let’s take this week to read it. It’s only ten pages. And then we’ll have the next two weeks to discuss it.

You are such a motivator, Manny. Thank you.

Hi Manny. I have missed you all. Should I ask something here about what you wrote thus far, or wait until the discussion?

Susan wrote: "Hi Manny. I have missed you all. Should I ask something here about what you wrote thus far, or wait until the discussion?"

If it relates to the introduction or the history of the work, you can post it now. Otherwise let's give everyone few more days to get into the body of the work.

Nice to see you Susan. Please stop by more often. Perhaps you can participate in our next read. We're taking nominations here:
https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/.... Perhaps you can think of a classic work to nominate.

Ok. My first question relates to "this present council wishes to set forth authentic doctrine...", and you write "put forth doctrine"......; As it was described as a "pastoral" council only, does this mean they are really just expressing known doctrine in a different way? (Not making any new definitive, declarative statements?)
I find the "following in the footsteps of the Council of Trent and the First Vatican Council" a little confusing also, as I didn't think this council 'followed in footsteps' - it seemed to be a unique council in that for the first time it was not convened to clarify any known or disruptive dispute per se... (other than maybe trying to address somewhat vaguely "changing times"...)
And my other question relates to your last statement. Are you able to clarify what you mean when you say "the Catholic Church...sees herself as having the responsibility of maintaining the faith for all, whether they consider themselves as part of the Catholic Church or not"? Would I be accurate in re-expressing what you were saying as, 'feels the responsibility to keep fidelity to what was handed on to Her, and to continue to express such to allow the opportunity for any and all to choose to believe?' There might be a subtle distinction there that I am trying to clarify.
If you prefer to wait until the discussions, no prob! I am glad this piece was chosen and I happened to see it and I have some time to engage. Looking forward to understanding better. Thanks.

No, that’s relevant to the introduction and context of the document. We can talk about that now. The only thing for me is I don’t know the answers to your questions. I’ll try to find something. Hopefully others will contribute too.

Thank you!

The first thing in understanding a work is to first understand the structure. The structure of Dei Verbum is given to us in six chapters with titles. Let me lay this out:

1. Revelation Itself
2. Handing on Divine Revelation
3. Sacred Scripture, It’s Inspiration and Divine Interpretation
4. The Old Testament
5. The New Testament
6. Sacred Scripture in the Life of the Church

A summary outline of Dei Verbum would be the understanding of how God revealed Himself to humanity, how humanity handed on that revelation, how it came to be written down as inspired scripture, both in the Old and New Testaments, and how the Church teaches with the scriptures to form the life of the faith.

I'll try to say something on each of these little chapters.

Susan wrote: "My first question relates to "this present council wishes to set forth authentic doctrine...", and you write "put forth doctrine"......; As it was described as a "pastoral" council only, does this mean they are really just expressing known doctrine in a different way? (Not making any new definitive, declarative statements?)
I find the "following in the footsteps of the Council of Trent and the First Vatican Council" a little confusing also, as I didn't think this council 'followed in footsteps' - it seemed to be a unique council in that for the first time it was not convened to clarify any known or disruptive dispute per se... (other than maybe trying to address somewhat vaguely "changing times"...)"

Susan, looking at your question, I don't it pertains to Dei Verbum, which is only one specific document of Vatican II. That question seems to be addressed to the objective of the Council itself. It's a broader question on which I am not schooled enough to answer. I just have not read up enough on the Vatican II.

Susan wrote: "And my other question relates to your last statement. Are you able to clarify what you mean when you say "the Catholic Church...sees herself as having the responsibility of maintaining the faith for all, whether they consider themselves as part of the Catholic Church or not"? Would I be accurate in re-expressing what you were saying as, 'feels the responsibility to keep fidelity to what was handed on to Her, and to continue to express such to allow the opportunity for any and all to choose to believe?' There might be a subtle distinction there that I am trying to clarify.."

Hmm, when I said that it came out of my understanding, perhaps out of my impressions. I don't know for a fact whether the Church feels that responsibility. I think it does, but I don't want to state it as absolutely certain. How do you and others feel on that? Do you think the Catholic Church feels the responsibility to maintain Christianity whether other sects of Christianity agree with her or not?

As to the subtle distinction you are making, yes, I would agree. It is part of the Bishop of Rome's responsibility and duty to keep fidelity with what has been handed down. It is his primary job function. I don't know if I meant to draw that distinction. Perhaps my choice of words were not perfect.

The first chapter states that “God chose to reveal Himself and make known the hidden purpose of His will.” That is what I would call a foundational statement to salvation history and the scriptures, which are nothing less than the Word of God. Here are key statements in chapter 1 fill out this claim. Each of these excerpts build toward the conclusion of chapter 1. The number in parenthesis is the number of the document.

This plan of revelation is realized by deeds and words having an inner unity: the deeds wrought by God in the history of salvation manifest and confirm the teaching and realities signified by the words, while the words proclaim the deeds and clarify the mystery contained in them. By this revelation then, the deepest truth about God and the salvation of man shines out for our sake in Christ, who is both the mediator and the fullness of all revelation. (2)

Through the patriarchs, and after them through Moses and the prophets, He taught this people to acknowledge Himself the one living and true God, provident father and just judge, and to wait for the Savior promised by Him, and in this manner prepared the way for the Gospel down through the centuries. (3)

Moreover He confirmed with divine testimony what revelation proclaimed, that God is with us to free us from the darkness of sin and death, and to raise us up to life eternal. (4)

To make this act of faith, the grace of God and the interior help of the Holy Spirit must precede and assist, moving the heart and turning it to God, opening the eyes of the mind and giving "joy and ease to everyone in assenting to the truth and believing it." (5) To bring about an ever deeper understanding of revelation the same Holy Spirit constantly brings faith to completion by His gifts. (5)

Through divine revelation, God chose to show forth and communicate Himself and the eternal decisions of His will regarding the salvation of men. That is to say, He chose to share with them those divine treasures which totally transcend the understanding of the human mind. (6)

The development of the excerpts reach this conclusion for chapter 1:

As a sacred synod has affirmed, God, the beginning and end of all things, can be known with certainty from created reality by the light of human reason (see Rom. 1:20); but teaches that it is through His revelation that those religious truths which are by their nature accessible to human reason can be known by all men with ease, with solid certitude and with no trace of error, even in this present state of the human race. (6)

God has revealed Himself and can be known through human reason.

Manny wrote: "God has revealed Himself and can be known through human reason."

This, in a nutshell, is what modernism denies, what we run up against every day.

Referencing 1 Timothy and Titus, this sentence on the bottom of paragraph 4 stood out for me:

The Christian dispensation, therefore, as the new and definitive covenant, will never pass away and we now await no further new public revelation before the glorious manifestation of our Lord Jesus Christ.

In other words, the deposit of faith is true and unalterable. It is. Yet from the very beginning men have tried to create wiggle room for themselves to make it in their own image. This famous G.K. Chesterton quote comes to mind:

The Christian ideal has not been tried and found wanting. It has been found difficult; and left untried.

Kerstin wrote: "Referencing 1 Timothy and Titus, this sentence on the bottom of paragraph 4 stood out for me: The Christian dispensation, therefore, as the new and definitive covenant, will never pass away and we..."

Agree Kerstin. The other takeaway from that passage you quote that should be noted is "we now await no further new public revelation before the glorious manifestation of our Lord Jesus Christ." That is important. Revelation has stopped with the apostles. Stuff like the Book of Mormon or the Koran can never be seen as revelation because revelation has ended. Any revelation by saints or mystics is private revelation and while it may be useful for devotional purposes cannot add to inspired revelation.

The second chapter deals with three related matters. Given that God has revealed Himself through scripture, His revelation first needs to be explained and handed down through the centuries. Second, to explain the revelation requires an understanding of the tradition from which it was understood. One cannot separate the scripture from the tradition. Taken together, scripture and tradition are a deposit of faith. And third, the Church was created to maintain and promulgate that faith. Here again are excerpts that build the argument.

In His gracious goodness, God has seen to it that what He had revealed for the salvation of all nations would abide perpetually in its full integrity and be handed on to all generations. (7)

But in order to keep the Gospel forever whole and alive within the Church, the Apostles left bishops as their successors, "handing over" to them "the authority to teach in their own place."(3) This sacred tradition, therefore, and Sacred Scripture of both the Old and New Testaments are like a mirror in which the pilgrim Church on earth looks at God, from whom she has received everything, until she is brought finally to see Him as He is, face to face (see 1 John 3:2) (7)

And so the apostolic preaching, which is expressed in a special way in the inspired books, was to be preserved by an unending succession of preachers until the end of time. Therefore the Apostles, handing on what they themselves had received, warn the faithful to hold fast to the traditions which they have learned either by word of mouth or by letter (see 2 Thess. 2:15) (8)

This tradition which comes from the Apostles develop in the Church with the help of the Holy Spirit. (5) For there is a growth in the understanding of the realities and the words which have been handed down. This happens through the contemplation and study made by believers, who treasure these things in their hearts (see Luke, 2:19, 51) through a penetrating understanding of the spiritual realities which they experience, and through the preaching of those who have received through Episcopal succession the sure gift of truth. For as the centuries succeed one another, the Church constantly moves forward toward the fullness of divine truth until the words of God reach their complete fulfillment in her. (8)

Here perhaps are the key couple of sentences for chapter 2:

Hence there exists a close connection and communication between sacred tradition and Sacred Scripture. For both of them, flowing from the same divine wellspring, in a certain way merge into a unity and tend toward the same end. (9)

To separate scripture from the tradition is to do what the Protestant Reformers did 1500 years after the Christ. It kept the scripture but shucked out most of the tradition to create a whole new understanding of Christianity. It was not what was handed over from the apostles. Chapter 2 continues with the need for a “teaching office” to maintain both halves of the deposit of faith, and that teaching office—commonly referred to as the “magisterium”—is part of the responsibility given to the Church. The logic of chapter 2 continues:

But the task of authentically interpreting the word of God, whether written or handed on, (8) has been entrusted exclusively to the living teaching office of the Church, (9) whose authority is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ. This teaching office is not above the word of God, but serves it, teaching only what has been handed on, listening to it devoutly, guarding it scrupulously and explaining it faithfully in accord with a divine commission and with the help of the Holy Spirit, it draws from this one deposit of faith everything which it presents for belief as divinely revealed. (10)

It is clear, therefore, that sacred tradition, Sacred Scripture and the teaching authority of the Church, in accord with God’s most wise design, are so linked and joined together that one cannot stand without the others, and that all together and each in its own way under the action of the one Holy Spirit contribute effectively to the salvation of souls. (10)

Finally it should be noted that the teaching office is guided by the Holy Spirit, a link to the divine.

I pretty much underlined the same passages.

Once one is on board with both Scripture and Tradition comprising the deposit of faith one can't go back. It makes so much sense. For me it really was intuitive. I had never been hung up on this particular hurdle while still Protestant.

The third chapter provides some facts about the nature of sacred scripture. First scripture comes to us through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.

Those divinely revealed realities which are contained and presented in Sacred Scripture have been committed to writing under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. (11)

God worked through real men with their own personalities and perspectives. Judeo-Christian sacred scripture is not a quoting from God, say in what Islam claims of Mohammed from Allah, but men who use with their own words, style, imagery, rhetorical gifts. That is the difference between inspiration and ventriloquism.

In composing the sacred books, God chose men and while employed by Him they made use of their powers and abilities, so that with Him acting in them and through them, they, as true authors, consigned to writing everything and only those things which He wanted. (11)

Nonetheless, inspired text are still the word of God and must be understood to be without error.

Therefore, since everything asserted by the inspired authors or sacred writers must be held to be asserted by the Holy Spirit, it follows that the books of Scripture must be acknowledged as teaching solidly, faithfully and without error that truth which God wanted put into sacred writings for the sake of salvation. (11)

But the form and genre of the author must understood to derive the full truth the author is trying to convey.

To search out the intention of the sacred writers, attention should be given, among other things, to "literary forms." For truth is set forth and expressed differently in texts which are variously historical, prophetic, poetic, or of other forms of discourse. (12)

God’s kindness and gentleness, indeed, His entire nature is present in the text.

In Sacred Scripture, therefore, while the truth and holiness of God always remains intact, the marvelous "condescension" of eternal wisdom is clearly shown, "that we may learn the gentle kindness of God, which words cannot express, and how far He has gone in adapting His language with thoughtful concern for our weak human nature." For the words of God, expressed in human language, have been made like human discourse, just as the word of the eternal Father, when He took to Himself the flesh of human weakness, was in every way made like men. (13)

The fourth chapter is short and sweet, but the conclusion is vitally important. It’s purpose is to give significance to the Old Testament and to make the bold claim that salvation history was planned by God and foreshadowed from the beginning. First it states the special importance of the Jewish people.

In carefully planning and preparing the salvation of the whole human race the God of infinite love, by a special dispensation, chose for Himself a people to whom He would entrust His promises. (14)

Then too, when God Himself spoke to them through the mouth of the prophets, Israel daily gained a deeper and clearer understanding of His ways and made them more widely known among the nations (see Ps. 21:29; 95:1-3; Is. 2:1-5; Jer. 3:17). (14)

It makes clear that there was a plan from the beginning, and the plan’s objective was the coming of Christ.

The principal purpose to which the plan of the old covenant was directed was to prepare for the coming of Christ, the redeemer of all and of the messianic kingdom, to announce this coming by prophecy (see Luke 24:44; John 5:39; 1 Peter 1:10), and to indicate its meaning through various types (see 1 Cor. 10:12). (15)

And it makes the bold statement that there is a relationship, a deep interconnection between the Old and New Testaments.

God, the inspirer and author of both Testaments, wisely arranged that the New Testament be hidden in the Old and the Old be made manifest in the New. (16)

The Old Testament is not just filler to get to the New.

The fifth chapter delineates the importance of the New Testament. It begins with the manifestation of the incarnation “when the fullness of time arrived (see Gal. 4:4), the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us in His fullness of graces and truth (see John 1:14).” This was a significant and climatic moment in salvation history.

This mystery had not been manifested to other generations as it was now revealed to His holy Apostles and prophets in the Holy Spirit (see Eph. 3:4-6, Greek text), so that they might preach the Gospel, stir up faith in Jesus, Christ and Lord, and gather together the Church. Now the writings of the New Testament stand as a perpetual and divine witness to these realities. (17)

Through the writing of the Gospels we arrive at the full knowledge of Jesus Christ, so the Word made flesh is revealed in the words of the scriptures.

It is common knowledge that among all the Scriptures, even those of the New Testament, the Gospels have a special preeminence, and rightly so, for they are the principal witness for the life and teaching of the incarnate Word, our savior. (18)

The sacred authors wrote the four Gospels, selecting some things from the many which had been handed on by word of mouth or in writing, reducing some of them to a synthesis, explaining some things in view of the situation of their churches and preserving the form of proclamation but always in such fashion that they told us the honest truth about Jesus. For their intention in writing was that either from their own memory and recollections, or from the witness of those who "themselves from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the Word" we might know "the truth" concerning those matters about which we have been instructed (see Luke 1:2-4). (19)

For the Lord Jesus was with His apostles as He had promised (see Matt. 28:20) and sent them the advocate Spirit who would lead them into the fullness of truth (see John 16:13). (20)

So we obtain the “fullness of truth” through the written word and through the spoken word of tradition guided by the Holy Spirit.

The sixth chapter brings all this context into a culminating point. We see here why the Word of God is so important.

The Church has always venerated the divine Scriptures just as she venerates the body of the Lord, since, especially in the sacred liturgy, she unceasingly receives and offers to the faithful the bread of life from the table both of God's word and of Christ's body….Therefore, like the Christian religion itself, all the preaching of the Church must be nourished and regulated by Sacred Scripture. (21)

… Since the word of God should be accessible at all times, the Church by her authority and with maternal concern sees to it that suitable and correct translations are made into different languages, especially from the original texts of the sacred books. And should the opportunity arise and the Church authorities approve, if these translations are produced in cooperation with the separated brethren as well, all Christians will be able to use them. (22)

And so we come to what I think is the completion of thought of Dei Verbum.

The bride of the incarnate Word, the Church taught by the Holy Spirit, is concerned to move ahead toward a deeper understanding of the Sacred Scriptures so that she may increasingly feed her sons with the divine words. Therefore, she also encourages the study of the holy Fathers of both East and West and of sacred liturgies. Catholic exegetes then and other students of sacred theology, working diligently together and using appropriate means, should devote their energies, under the watchful care of the sacred teaching office of the Church, to an exploration and exposition of the divine writings. This should be so done that as many ministers of the divine word as possible will be able effectively to provide the nourishment of the Scriptures for the people of God, to enlighten their minds, strengthen their wills, and set men's hearts on fire with the love of God. The sacred synod encourages the sons of the Church and Biblical scholars to continue energetically, following the mind of the Church, with the work they have so well begun, with a constant renewal of vigor. (23)

The Word of God is God, and one of the key ways to know God and to love God. The religious and the laity need to understand it, through the teaching of the Church, for it builds our foundation as Christians.

For the Sacred Scriptures contain the word of God and since they are inspired, really are the word of God; and so the study of the sacred page is, as it were, the soul of sacred theology. By the same word of Scripture the ministry of the word also, that is, pastoral preaching, catechetics and all Christian instruction, in which the liturgical homily must hold the foremost place, is nourished in a healthy way and flourishes in a holy way. (24)

The document lays down the gauntlet: we Catholics are Bible Christians. We use the Bible as much as Protestants, and we should all do so with frequency.

The sacred synod also earnestly and especially urges all the Christian faithful, especially Religious, to learn by frequent reading of the divine Scriptures the "excellent knowledge of Jesus Christ" (Phil. 3:8). "For ignorance of the Scriptures is ignorance of Christ." Therefore, they should gladly put themselves in touch with the sacred text itself, whether it be through the liturgy, rich in the divine word, or through devotional reading, or through instructions suitable for the purpose and other aids which, in our time, with approval and active support of the shepherds of the Church, are commendably spread everywhere. And let them remember that prayer should accompany the reading of Sacred Scripture, so that God and man may talk together; for "we speak to Him when we pray; we hear Him when we read the divine saying." (25)

And why must we do so, that is, read scripture more frequently? To evangelize!

In this way, therefore, through the reading and study of the sacred books "the word of God may spread rapidly and be glorified" (2 Thess. 3:1) and the treasure of revelation, entrusted to the Church, may more and more fill the hearts of men. (26)

I know we Catholics have a lot of devotionals and non-scriptural means of building a relationship with all three persons of the Trinity and with the Body of Christ, and that is a good thing. But one should not exclude the frequent reading of scripture. Indeed, one needs to integrate scripture to fully nurture those devotionals. I found Dei Verbum a wonderful and clearly argued document.

Manny wrote: "Kerstin wrote: "Referencing 1 Timothy and Titus, this sentence on the bottom of paragraph 4 stood out for me: The Christian dispensation, therefore, as the new and definitive covenant, will never p..."


What about the experiences of the Saints? I am thinking of St Faustina in particular here, though there are more.

Christine in BoMass, USA wrote: "What about the experiences of the Saints? I am thinking of St Faustina in particular here, though there are more.."

Christine, are you referring to private revelation? St. Faustina's diary is considered private revelation. Revelation given to saints and people alike is not considered official revelation. Official revelation ended with the New Testament. Whatever private revelations have come to people is not considered full or clear or complete. It may not be suspect, but the person who received the revelation, even if he/she be a saint, may be filtering it through the prism of their understanding or consciousness. Ultimately these private revelations come from fallible sources. Not only that, if you really started looking at the private revelations of many saints, you will probably find distinctions and contradictions. We Catholics may find useful material in private revelations but we are free to choose to believe or not private revelations.

For instance from what I understand St. Faustina has a vision of an angel of the Lord ready to strike the earth and destroy it. I personally find that hard to believe. It doesn't even seem like Divine Mercy. Perhaps I'm picking a bad example because I haven't read the details. I'll eventually get to reading her diary, but for me that sort of private revelation is something I am free to not believe.

Anyway, here are two articles that explain public versus private revelation by Jimmy Akin from Catholic Answers.
First:
https://www.catholic.com/magazine/pri...

Second:
https://www.catholic.com/magazine/pri...

If there is something in either article that contradicts what I just explained, let me know. I wish to learn further myself.

Thank you Manny. I will look into this. I do read a lot on the Saints as they are great examples. I was taken abackr a bit there, concerned that I have been wasting my time.

I read St Faustina's diary. Stream of consciousness...very difficult to read. I don't recall the striking bit, however I could have easily missed it.

Yes we are all still learning. It is a blessed thing. :)

Christine in BoMass, USA wrote: "Thank you Manny. I will look into this. I do read a lot on the Saints as they are great examples. I was taken abackr a bit there, concerned that I have been wasting my time.

I read St Faustina's d..."

No! You have not been wasting your time. The saints provide great example and learning but their private visions are for instructive purposes, not doctrine. That angel ready to strike the world from St. Faustina's diary can be seen as showing God's displeasure toward the sin in the world. It has instructive value. But whether it actually happened is for us to choose.

For instance, St. Catherine of Siena had a vision that Christ had exchanged her heart with His. On this I believe. It did change her. But I can understand someone saying, "come on, how could that happen?" He would be free not to believe that.

Here I found the excerpt from St. Faustina that describes this:

As written in the Diary of St. Faustina:

"[The angel] was clothed in a dazzling robe, his face gloriously bright, a cloud beneath his feet. From the cloud, bolts of thunder and flashes of lightning were springing into his hands; and from his hand they were going forth, and only then were they striking the earth.

When I saw this sign of divine wrath which was about to strike the earth, and in particular a certain place, which for good reasons I cannot name, I began to implore the angel to hold off for a few moments, and the world would do penance. But my plea was a mere nothing in the face of the divine anger.

Just then I saw the Most Holy Trinity. The greatness of Its majesty pierced me deeply, and I did not dare to repeat my entreaties. At that very moment I felt in my soul the power of Jesus' grace, which dwells in my soul. When I became conscious of this grace, I was instantly snatched up before the Throne of God. Oh, how great is our Lord and God and how incomprehensible His holiness! I will make no attempt to describe this greatness, because before long we shall all see Him as He is.

I found myself pleading with God for the world with words heard interiorly. As I was praying in this manner, I saw the Angel’s helplessness: he could not carry out the just punishment which was rightly due for sins. Never before had I prayed with such inner power as I did then. The words with which I entreated God are these:

Eternal Father, I offer You the Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity of Your dearly beloved Son, Our Lord Jesus Christ, in atonement for our sins and those of the whole world; for the sake of His sorrowful Passion, have mercy on us.

The next morning, when I entered chapel, I heard these words interiorly:

Every time you enter the chapel, immediately recite the prayer which I taught you yesterday.' When I had said the prayer, in my soul I heard these words: 'This prayer will serve to appease My wrath . . ."..

It's part of a large article:
https://www.catholiccompany.com/magaz....

For God to have that kind of "wrath" strikes me as attributing to God an extremely anthropomorphic personality. It just doesn't feel correct to me. But those who have a very Old Testament view of God's personality may find that natural.

Thanks Manny for the great synopsis of Dei Verbum

I recently found that the Institute of Catholic Culture has a two lectures (going by itunes podacasts) on Dei Verbum. I haven't listened to them yet.

https://instituteofcatholicculture.or...

Thanks Kerstin. I will check them out. ICC usually has great stuff.

I found three videos on YouTube worth watching to help absorb Dei Verbum. Let me share.

(1) This one on Vatican II and how Dei Verbum was part of it.
https://youtu.be/arVnL7fCfZ8

(2) On Chapter 3 of Dei Verbum, on Divine Inspiration.
https://youtu.be/0wR3JyeVBRE

(3) Bishop Robert Barron summarizing Dei Verbum
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IRpy1...

They are not long and all worth watching.

I was looking through my notes on Dei Verbum for my online diocese Catholic Lay Ministry classes, these notes will be the basis of my YouTube video on Dei Verbum:

What new insights or questions emerge as you prayerfully read and reflect upon Chapters 3, 4, 5 and 6 of Dei Verbum? Reference the chapter and article (paragraph number) you are addressing for our Discussion Board.

Chapter 3(11) of Dei Verbum teaches that the “books of both the Old and New Testaments in their entirety, with all their parts, are sacred and canonical because written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, they have God as their author and have been handed on as such to the Church herself.” This means it really is irrelevant whether these books were written by one person, many persons over many years, or whether a redactor was involved. As much as God participated in the Creation of man, molding man in His hands, so God Himself was instrumental in the process by which the canon of Scripture was passed down to us by the Church and by His chosen people.

Reverence for Scripture also means we should study it diligently and responsibly, “to search out the intention of the sacred writers” (3-12), using scholarship to determine linguistically and culturally what the Scriptures meant to those ancient people who initially received them. Modern scholarship, taken too far, unfortunately leads to chopping the text apart into ever finer pieces, losing the overall message, so we should be careful to respect the “content and unity of the whole of Scripture if the meaning of the sacred texts” if their meaning “is to be correctly worked out” and “the living tradition of the whole Church must be taken into account” (3-12) when interpreting Scripture.

The pastoral purpose of Vatican II, that its pronouncements not be an endless string of anathemas, but rather a pastoral concern for the ordinary Christian, is evident in Chapter 3-13 of Dei Verbum: Sacred Scripture, therefore, while the truth and holiness of God always remains intact, the marvelous "condescension" of eternal wisdom is clearly shown, "that we may learn the gentle kindness of God, which words cannot express, and how far He has gone in adapting His language with thoughtful concern for our weak human nature."

The Church in Dei Verbum refuses to abandon Tradition for dry scholarship when she teaches that “the Church has always and everywhere held and continues to hold that the four Gospels are of apostolic origin.” (5-18) The fact that some of the stories of Jesus are told in different ways in the various Gospels should not challenge our faith, for Dei Verbum teaches that “The sacred authors wrote the four Gospels, selecting some things from the many which had been handed on by word of mouth or in writing, reducing some of them to a synthesis, explaining some things in view of the situation of their churches and preserving the form of proclamation but always in such fashion that they told us the honest truth about Jesus.” (5-19). In the Vatican II spirit of reconciliation with the Eastern Churches, Dei Verbum also teaches that “the study of the holy Fathers of both East and West and of sacred liturgies” is also encouraged. (6-23)

Diligent study of Scriptures is encouraged, especially by priests, deacons, and catechumens. (6-22) Much of the Catholic Catechism’s teaching on revelation is lifted straight out of Dei Verbum.
==========================
I had bought some books on Vatican II, since I thought the background information would be useful for the Catholic Doctrine course coming up:
Joseph Ratzinger, Theological Highlights of Vatican II, and O’Malley, What Happened at Vatican II (also wrote a book on Council of Trent).

Ratzinger wrote (p 43) that in Pope John’s opening speech to Vatican II, “he had insisted that the Church was no longer to condemn but rather to dispense the medicine of compassion, that the Council was not to speak negatively but to present the faith in a new and positive way, and finally that the Council must refrain from pronouncing anathemas.” The initial text of what would become Dei Verbum was one of the first pronouncements to be considered. As originally written, it was more condemning than encouraging, still favoring a too heavy emphasis on Scholastic theology, and not accommodating to the modern scholarship that we are studying in this course. One of the key arguments was over the definition of Tradition. The Vatican I bishops wanted the Church to say that Tradition taught some doctrines not in Scripture, and although Dei Verbum did not condemn this view, neither did it mention it. Also, the Vatican I bishops were uncomfortable describing Tradition as something that “develops” in the church over time (Dei Verbum 2-7).

Rather than putting this text to a two-thirds vote for approval, the bishops assembled were asked to vote on whether it would be withdrawn. This vote did not get the two thirds vote needed for withdrawal, and Pope John assigned the text to a special commission that substantially revised it. In the third session three years later it was approved after much internal debate. Ratzinger notes that when the Pope reassigned the text to a mixed commission to review, that “the Pope had asserted his authority in favor of the Council majority. This decision was of great fundamental importance. The Council had resolutely set itself against perpetuating a one-side anti-Modernist approach and so had chosen a new and positive approach.” This “was a real turning point.” (Ratzinger p. 48)
============================
Julie writes: I remember one priest giving a homily on the loaves and fishes given to the crowd of over 5,000. His take was not that Jesus had multiplied the food, but that as he started to distribute the food, others in the crowd reached into their bags and shared what they had. He said the real miracle was the openness and sharing of the people. At the time I thought that was an interesting concept, but still it leaves me wondering.
If we truly believe Christ resurrected Himself from the dead and walked on the earth and ascended into Heaven, and as St Paul exhorts us, if we do not believe in Christ’s crucifixion and resurrection we are not truly Christians and we are truly wasting our time, then feeding five thousand people with some loaves and fishes is an easy task. God created the world ex nihilo, out of nothing, that was a much greater miracle than multiplying bread and fish. This miracle recalled the manna and quail miraculously provided the children of Israel in the desert of Sinai, so if you deny the miracle of the loaves and fishes then next is denying the miracle of manna provided from Heaven in the wilderness, and where do you stop? How do you keep your entire belief system from unravelling?

What has been your most significant learning in this session?
Reading Dei Verbum and the Vatican II history behind the declaration. So much of the Catholic Catechism is lifted directly from the Vatican II documents that you really need a good grasp of Vatican II, its history, and the documents it issued, and the Council of Trent also.

In order to study the Scriptures, one needs to understand: The World behind the Text, The World of the Text, and World in front of the Text. Why is this important?

The world behind the text is the world that generated the text. What was the message to the people to whom the text was originally addressed? To try to put ourselves in the shoes of ancients, we need to know the history the ancients were living through, what life was like for ancients, what was their culture. Who was the intended audience of the text? Scholars who specialize in low level textual criticism study the text in its original languages, searching for clues within the text that may indicate when it was written. What was the original meaning of the text? Scholars also compare the various manuscripts to try to reconstruct the original text.

The world of the text is studying the text itself, and the message brings to the ancient readers. The book doesn’t clarify this, but since some of these books probably evolved over many years, this means the generations of the original ancient readers. This involves both low-level and high-level criticisms, and using Scripture to interpret Scripture, especially since most Scripture echoes the psalms and parables and stories of earlier Scriptures. This includes noticing the plot, the message, poetic devices, character development, and other literary devices. “How does the author manipulate the feelings, expectations, and ideas of the reader to create an effect or make a point?”

The world in front of the text is the reader. Scripture must be continually interpreted to apply itself to modern questions of morality and ethics. But we must remember who needs to influence whom, it is the Scriptures that need to influence our culture, and care must be taken that culture does not unduly influence Scripture. As the Vatican teachings have pointed out, feminist and liberation theology cannot replace the original message of Scripture for a more politically correct message. Like the book says, the reader cannot become a bully, demanding the biblical text live up to the standards he has set for it.

Why is this understanding important? So we do not misread Scripture. We should ask for the assistance of the Holy Spirit in interpreting Scripture, but we should also remember the Holy Spirit has been inspiring the Church Fathers for two hundred years, and in modern times we have scholars who spend their careers learning ancient languages to ensure we have the most dependable texts. The Holy Spirit speaks through the Church, and we cannot ignore the teaching and tradition of interpretation when reading Scriptures.

Also, we often fall into the bad habit of memorizing verses, and Scripture is not meant to be read one isolated verse at a time. We need to read a chapter ahead, a chapter behind, sometimes more, and often read the Scriptures that are being referenced. For example, I remember in Bible study this lady was quoting a verse out of Job, except that she was quoting from one of Job’s friends, and the point of the book of Job is the speeches given by his friends contain subtle theological flaws that the reader must discover.

Catholic Lay Ministry class notes continued:

1. Divine revelation
It appears that I am directly quoting from Dei Verbum here:
Revelation means unveiling. We can discover worldly knowledge through natural reason, but heavenly knowledge, “mysteries that are hidden in God can never be known unless they are revealed by God.” DS3015

Dei Verbum 2: In His goodness and wisdom God chose to reveal Himself and to make known to us the hidden purpose of His will (see Eph. 1:9) by which through Christ, the Word made flesh, man might in the Holy Spirit have access to the Father and come to share in the divine nature (see Eph. 2:18; 2 Peter 1:4). Through this revelation, therefore, the invisible God (see Col. 1;15, 1 Tim. 1:17) out of the abundance of His love speaks to men as friends (see Ex. 33:11; John 15:14-15) and lives among them (see Bar. 3:38), so that He may invite and take them into fellowship with Himself. This plan of revelation is realized by deeds and words having an inner unity: the deeds wrought by God in the history of salvation manifest and confirm the teaching and realities signified by the words, while the words proclaim the deeds and clarify the mystery contained in them. By this revelation then, the deepest truth about God and the salvation of man shines out for our sake in Christ, who is both the mediator and the fullness of all revelation.

We see in this passage in Dei Verbum the same pattern we see in the Decalogue, proclaiming our Love of God and neighbor in our thoughts, words, and deeds. Through the Holy Spirit and Love of God our thoughts, our innermost being is turned toward our God, by words we proclaim the deeds and mystery of our God, by deeds we live the teaching and realities revealed by the Word of God.

Dei Verbum 3. God, who through the Word creates all things (see John 1:3) and keeps them in existence, gives men an enduring witness to Himself in created realities (see Rom. 1:19-20). Planning to make known the way of heavenly salvation, He went further and from the start manifested Himself to our first parents. Then after their fall His promise of redemption aroused in them the hope of being saved (see Gen. 3:15) and from that time on He ceaselessly kept the human race in His care, to give eternal life to those who perseveringly do good in search of salvation (see Rom. 2:6-7). Then, at the time He had appointed He called Abraham in order to make of him a great nation (see Gen. 12:2). Through the patriarchs, and after them through Moses and the prophets, He taught this people to acknowledge Himself the one living and true God, provident father and just judge, and to wait for the Savior promised by Him, and in this manner prepared the way for the Gospel down through the centuries.

As St Maximus teaches, it was the Divine Plan before the fall for the Son of God to take flesh and dwell among us, and as God took on flesh to become man, so this gives man the ability through deification to be like God, through grace and the daily discipline of Loving God, loving neighbor; repenting, forgiving everyone; loving selflessly, shunning selfishness; reining in the passions, being dispassionate; so through God’s Divine Revelation we may be adopted as sons of the Father, and enjoy life eternal, seeking after God, dwelling in “unapproachable light.” “By revealing Himself God wishes to make them capable of responding to Him, knowing Him, and Loving Him far beyond their natural capacity.” CC52

Up to now, I’ve been reluctant to really refer to my YouTube channel, because people get upset when I “promote my channel.” In my view, it’s better to have a researched 20,000-word analysis than to post several hundred-word screeds that inflame passions by repeating commonly accepted, though ill-researched, talking points. So, please forgive my tardiness in posting this, I dislike being yelled at. Please let me know if this posting is welcome or not.

One of the primary goals of my YouTube channel is to reflect on the decrees of Vatican II and the Catholic Catechism, since the Catholic Catechism is a restatement of the teachings of Vatican II, and both are a restatement of the teachings from the Council of Trent. This video on Vatican II includes the debates over the controversial decrees, including Dei Verbum. My primary source for my main videos on the council of Trent and Vatican II are the books by writings of William J O’Malley, an influential Jesuit Professor who is the pre-eminent scholar of Vatican II and Trent.
https://youtu.be/vHtYu6UtiuE
https://youtu.be/Thq1blvzWHs
https://youtu.be/i8WXS7l4OzE

In our channel, we both reflect on the actual decrees and church constitutions themselves, and also the many books published by the main actors before and after the council. In the case of Dei Verbum, the Yves Congar book, On the Meaning of Tradition, is a key background work for Dei Verbum.
https://youtu.be/f0gQ_Y9tROo

Also, the decree by Pope Benedict the 16th on biblical interpretation is also reflecting the teachings of Dei Verbum in the council.
https://youtu.be/6jwUNScn_sM

Since there are so many sources on Vatican II, we scanned the both William O’Malley and Amazon, and produced a video on the various books and lectures on Vatican II.
https://youtu.be/cuKVG24Bf78

Also, my video on Pope Francis it is indirectly related to Dei Verbum because it teaches us the proper way to communicate with each other on the Internet, keeping in mind that we are to express our two-fold Love for God and our love for neighbor in all that we do.
https://youtu.be/jF-fsMvYsak

Vatican II was all about returning to the sources, the writings of the ancient and medieval church fathers. Key among the church fathers is the highly influential work by Saint Augustine, On Christian Teaching or, On Christian Doctrine, which was a direct influence on Dei Verbum and the official Catholic attitude towards biblical interpretation.
https://youtu.be/uQCnAJMPoos

This is my video is my video on the Decree on Religious Freedom.
My main complaint with much of the Vatican II scholarship, including William O’Malley, is that it does not sufficiently emphasize how much the World War II experience, particularly by the Catholic Church, influenced Vatican II. This is simply due to the fact that, at the time many of these books were written, these were recent events, so recent that they were as ever-pervasive as the atmosphere. This indirectly influenced Dei Verbum.
https://youtu.be/i_zGeTW9QMI

My recent video on the philosophy of the channel, which includes my views on Vatican II, Trent, and the catechisms, is also a personal statement of faith, which you can review to determine whether or not you think I am a friend or a foe of the Catholic Church.
https://youtu.be/Si0TsO5bNr0

Are further posts on Dei Verbum welcome?

Would an invitation on my online discussion group on St John of the Cross, and the writings of Pseudo-Dionysus on the Mystical Writings that St John of Cross quotes directly, welcome?

Bruce wrote: "Up to now, I’ve been reluctant to really refer to my YouTube channel, because people get upset when I “promote my channel.” In my view, it’s better to have a researched 20,000-word analysis than to..."

I don't know if people get upset with self promotion, but they do get turned off. If it's relevant, that's fine. But if one continues to promote themselves, especially if one is earning money from clicks, I think people start ignoring that person. Sure post the links but at some point it becomes of diminishing emphasis. And while a 20,000 word essay might be impressive, I doubt many people are going to commit all that time to someone they don't know. Most people are going to pick the 200 word essay by Dr. Scott Hahn than an unknown person's essay.

That said Bruce, your videos seem very insightful.

Bruce wrote: "This video on Vatican II includes the debates over the controversial decrees, including Dei Verbum. My primary source for my main videos on the council of Trent and Vatican II are the books by writings of William J O’Malley, an influential Jesuit Professor who is the pre-eminent scholar of Vatican II and Trent.."

So which of the videos are specific to Dei Verbum. This short read was limited in scope. We have discussed reading something significant on Vatican II but we haven't been able to pick a specific work. I don't think most of us are up on the Vatican II as a whole.

As to Dei Verbum in particular, what is controversial in this document? I personally could not sense anything written that would cause controversy.

Bruce wrote: "Are further posts on Dei Verbum welcome?

On Dei Verbum yes. Folders are never closed, even after we have moved on to another read. But please be specific to ei Verbum. This read was not about Vatican II but specifically about one document, Dei Verbum.

Would an invitation on my online discussion group on St John of the Cross, and the writings of Pseudo-Dionysus on the Mystical Writings that St John of Cross quotes directly, welcome?."

Sure in the File titled Gathering Space there folders for various general discussion to point outside resources. I don't know which file that would fit best in, either Catholic Talks or Catholic Blogs or Catholic Websites. I'll let you choose.
https://www.goodreads.com/topic/group...