iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Daniel J. Harrington, S.J.

GET UPDATES FROM Daniel J. Harrington, S.J.
 

Lectio Divina: A Critical and Religious Reading of the Bible

Posted: 10/12/2012 8:00 am

In The Bible and the Believer, Marc Z. Brettler, Peter Enns, and I explore how biblical scholars from different traditions--Jewish, Evangelical, and Catholic--integrate their historical-critical learning with their ongoing religious commitments. The word "historical" means reading the text in its ancient context, and "critical" means using the power of reason and judgment. Here I want to illustrate with reference to Exodus 3:1-6 how those in the Catholic tradition might do so. The framework is lectio divina ("sacred reading"), an ancient monastic practice that can be adapted to include both historical-critical and religious readings of texts. It has four steps: reading, meditation, prayer, and action.

Reading
Here the question is, What does the text say? The context of Exodus 3:1-6 is the account in Exodus 3-4 of Moses' initial encounter with the Yahweh, the God of Israel. It comes after the narratives of his birth and infancy, as well as of his murder of an Egyptian and flight to the land of Midian. The text according to the New Revised Standard Version reads as follows:

"Moses was keeping the flock of his father-in-law Jethro, the priest of Midian; he led his flock beyond the wilderness, and came to Horeb, the mountain of God. There the angel of the Lord appeared to him in a flame of fire out of a bush; he looked, and the bush was blazing, yet it was not consumed. Then Moses said, 'I must turn aside and look at this great sight, and see why the bush is not burned up.' When the Lord saw that he had turned aside to see, God called to him out of the bush, 'Moses, Moses!' And he said, 'Here I am.' Then he said, 'Come no closer! Remove the sandals from your feet, for the place on which you are standing is holy ground.' He said further, 'I am the God of your father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.' And Moses hid his face, for he was afraid to look at God."

The first step in analyzing a biblical text is literary criticism, that is, examining the words and images (the mountain of God, the angel of the Lord, the burning bush, the Lord, holy ground), the characters (Moses, the Lord), the plot or structure, the literary type or form (theophany, or divine revelation), and the message (dynamics of religious experience, encounter with the sacred).

The text is a perfect example of the mysterium tremendum et fascinans of religious experience. It begins in Moses' curiosity, which demands further inspection, involves a call to personal relationship, leads to a recognition of the sacred as different from the profane, features the identification of Yahweh (the Lord) with the God of the ancestors, and ends with Moses' reverent fear. His encounter is fascinating, mysterious, and overwhelming.

Behind the text lays a host of (most unresolved) historical questions. What does the divine name YHWH mean? In 3:14 Moses is to tell the Egyptians that "I am who am" sent him. The name may refer to this God as creator: "the one who causes to be." Or it may be a way of saying, "Read on and you will see." Medieval philosophers found in this text the basis for understanding God as pure being. This raises the further questions whether Yahweh may have been the tribal god of the people of Midian and Moses' father-in-law, and how Yahweh related historically to the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.

In scholarly circles the account in Exodus 3:1-6 is customarily assigned to the J ("Yahwist") source, because it features the divine name "Yahweh." That source, while very early (10th-9th century), is still hundreds of years distant from Moses. How can be sure what comes from Moses? What really happened? There are many different answers to these questions, and they are debated vigorously. The believer has to recognize these questions, without necessarily being overwhelmed by them, since what is most important is the text as it stands.

Meditation
Here the question is, What does the text say to me? Of course, Exodus 3:1-6 may say many different things to many different people. For believers it is not simply a relic of the past or even a classic text. It is these things but more. It is a sacred text. Some refer to it as "the word of God." For thousands of years people have read, mediated, and prayed over this text.

The purpose of reading such a biblical text is to open one's mind and heart to the religious heritage of Judaism and Christianity. The kind of literary and historical analysis illustrated above can help to uncover the riches within the text. When meditating on a biblical passage, some find it helpful to enter the scene by way of their imagination. Think of yourself on Mount Horeb beside Moses. What do you see? What do you hear? What might you smell, touch, or taste?

Longtime believers may find in this text confirmation of their own religious experiences, while recent converts might use it to connect their experiences with the great tradition of biblical call stories (Moses, Isaiah, and Jeremiah). Some may focus on the symbol of the burning bush, while others may reflect on the text's revelation of God or empathize with Moses' development from curiosity to "fear of the Lord" (a good thing in the Bible).

In my own life this text has been very influential. As a boy I stuttered. When I heard that Moses stuttered, I looked up Exodus 4:10, where Moses says to God, "I am slow of speech and sloe of tongue." But I found much more than that. Reading the whole of Exodus 3-4 introduced me to the dynamics of religious experience, and eventually led me to become a Jesuit priest and a specialist in biblical studies. Whenever I find myself discouraged, I go back to this text and find in it encouragement and direction.

Prayer
Here the question is, What do I want to say to God on the basis of this text? Many Christians and Jews use biblical texts as starting points in their prayer. With regard to such a rich text as Exodus 3:1-6, it may be sufficient to say "Wow." Many readers may want to thank God for their own religious experiences, and compare and contrast them with that of Moses. Other who feel less centered may ask God for help in enriching their relationship with God.

Contemplation/Action
Those who pray with Scripture often find the exercise so engaging that they want to stay with the text, further relish its details, and integrate it into their piety. This is contemplation. Still others find that their engagement with the text may prompt them to take action: Resolve to pray more; join a Bible study group; work on some problem or obstacle in their life; engage in interreligious dialogue; or be more active in the community.

Serious historical-critical biblical study and the devotional use of Scripture need not be viewed as opposites. In fact, they can and should enrich one another. Lectio divina provides a good framework for doing so.

Daniel J. Harrington, S.J. is professor of New Testament at Boston College School of Theology and Ministry.

 
 
 
FOLLOW RELIGION
In The Bible and the Believer, Marc Z. Brettler, Peter Enns, and I explore how biblical scholars from different traditions--Jewish, Evangelical, and Catholic--integrate their historical-critical learn...
In The Bible and the Believer, Marc Z. Brettler, Peter Enns, and I explore how biblical scholars from different traditions--Jewish, Evangelical, and Catholic--integrate their historical-critical learn...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 526
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (5 total)
07:47 AM on 10/18/2012
YHWH, this passage with God and moses is something that we should do, turn to God. God annouces Who He is here and that He always was. God always existed, God needs nothing to exist
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
suebeedue
07:46 AM on 10/19/2012
He certainly does not need us, but he loves us enough to allow us to exist, to send his Son to die in our behalf and to put up with the imperfect people that we are, and for all of that and much more, I am truly grateful! I will publish about his coming kingdom until the end, which is really a beginning of the "real life".
01:02 AM on 10/20/2012
So his son died on the cross knowing he would be resurrected (if you believe in that silly story).

So my question is, IF you believe that, how much did jesus really sacrifice?

Not much.

Turn to humanism. You'll be much happier.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
blessed457100902
Smooth Christian married man. Frank honest and dir
07:27 AM on 10/18/2012
From the manuscripts to its current form the bible remains the only book one can read and have a Spiritual transformation take place instantly as soon as you shut off your unbelief and turn on your belief that his word says exactly what it says. It is the only book which the (comforter) actually communicates with you and guides you your remaining days on this earth. The key to understanding the bible –Gods words written by men/women is doubt and unbelief must be placed in arrest and locked up forever and you submitting to the will and authority of God through JESUS our adversary to the Father Once you become blood bought and blood washed-baptized in his name you become a new creation behold the old things are passed away your doubt and unbelief and the new man seeking gods spirit and his thought for your life becomes new. As long as you remain on route 66 the books of the bible you cannot go wrong.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
suebeedue
07:55 AM on 10/19/2012
You said "adversary" to the Father, when talking about Jesus and I know it was a little mistake. Just wanted you to know. I think you meant "mediator", since "adversary" means opponent and is a term we use for Satan.

I agree with the transformative powers that you talk about as we read the Bible. Many people here make fun of the fact that people disagree with what a particular Scripture means, or if a particular doctrine is actually in line with the Scriptures, but that is where, if not everyone can be right (and I don't believe they can) then the Scriptures discern our deepest motivations as to the understanding. The power of the holy spirit will guide us if we let it, and the Scriptures all fit like a hand in a glove.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
blessed457100902
Smooth Christian married man. Frank honest and dir
09:54 AM on 10/19/2012
Thanks for that correction and that is exactly what I should
have said. You are correct the final word should be verified by the Holy Spirit
which cannot operate in an empty vessel or morally corrupt one either. Clearly
we should be of one mind and one accord and the only way that can happen if two
or three are gathered in his name he said there he is in our midst, the only legitimate
referee in a biblical dispute between the brethren/sisters should be the Holy
Spirit. Thank you for sharing the word with me I’m pleasantly surprised…….
07:22 PM on 10/17/2012
My own take: "ehyeh asher ehyeh" is what I recall that the Torah says--and the translation has eluded people for thousands of years. My own take is that the "Lord" is reminding Moses the real Creator-God is beyond a name, beyond words, beyond comprehension. "I am what I am" is as good a translation as any--a reminder of the "god" whom we seem to instinctively seek and who transcends both religion and faith. The creator creates all around us, and it is this "discovery" handed down through Judaism, Christianity and Islam that forms the basis of monotheistic religion, while it is also at the core of individual faith independent of any religion. The true god is not "a god," nor "a tribal deity," nor a "consorted" nature god--but "GOD!" [mysterium tremendum et fascinans, as the writer mentions] --and that is what Moses handed on. Like the current pontiff, I feel that a "name"--such as the one re-discovered by archeologists and now used so casually in worship and conversation, from YHWH--destroys this Mosaic heritage. Jesus avoided it, and Mohammed always uses the generic "allah."
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
suebeedue
08:17 PM on 10/19/2012
I don't agree that using the YHWH or Jehovah in our English translation after adding vowels, destroys Gods name at all, but draws us close to our Creator. Jesus did not avoid God's name, and it was not in Mosaic heritage to avoid the name either. The Hebrew Scriptures themselves give no evidence that any of God's servants ever hesitated to pronounce the name. According to writings, there is no sound reason for any disuse of the divine name in the B.C. period. A superstition did develop in the first and second centuries CE calling for a discontinuance of the use of God's name by the Jews.

The Tetragrammaton YHWH appears 6,828 times. The very frequency of the appearance of the name attests to its importance to the Bible's Author, who's name it is. The use of it throughout Scriptures far outnumbers that of any titles such as "Sovereign Lord" or "God" applied to him.

Finally, Mohammed always using the "generic Allah" as you say, does not influence what the Bible says is God's name. The word Allah is a title that means "the God".
08:34 AM on 10/20/2012
You and I could have a very interesting discussion, and I mean that seriously and happily. I did not say that the use of the name "destroys God's name"--I said--and maintain that the "name" never existed, in my opinion. The divinity that the Israelites and subsequent Jews worshiped was unnamed because "He" is the "God who simply is."--beyond, above and beside any "naming." To name, the theologians remind us, is to have power over a person. (As a teacher, a substitute teacher, I can attest to the power of knowing somone's name.) Secondly, you say that Jesus did not avoid God's name. It would be interesting to see your evidence for that. I find it nowhere in the gospels that Jesus ever uses this YHWH name. On the contrary, I am deeply, deeply convinced that calling His Father by a name would be as disrespectful as calling my own father by his first name. I know of no culture where a son calls his father by his First Name except in cases of disrespect. Third, the tetragrammaton does appear of course, and is "pointed" by the Massoretes to Elohim (the cognate of Allah). "Jehovah" is a sixteenth century mistake. It just is a mistake. these are my conclusions, and, in the end, the practice I live by. My (biblical) God is beyond naming--God IS.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
UncleDale
retired librarian fromMaine,living in Florida.
01:43 PM on 10/17/2012
The first step might be in acknowledging that the Old testament(Torah) was written by Orthodox Jews for Orthodox Jews and that they didn't want, or intend any other groups using their holy scripture. So along comes the Christians who steal the Torah to give legitimacy to their new religion and along come the Muslims,attributing Abraham's first born son as the founder of their religion, and they also stealing parts of the Torah for their religion. So let's meditate on that.
Syllogizer
Barely Left of Pobedonostsev
03:12 PM on 10/17/2012
You call that "the first step", but that would be a mis-step. "Orthodox Jews" actually came rather late in the history, after the division into Pharisees and Sadducees. A lot of people have no trouble believing that the human authors of Torah were not what modern Orthodox Jews would accept as 'Orthodox'.
photo
CalSailor
Christian, therefore liberal
08:16 PM on 10/18/2012
And yet, in the beginning of the third century BCE, the Jewish community translated its Tanak (not just Torah) into Greek, so that it could be more widely read. If the desire was to keep it only within the Jewish community, why translate Tanak into Greek, so that not only Jews in the disapora could read Tanak, but also anyone else of the time could read it (since Greek was the everyday language of much of society. Why not spend the same effort in teaching those diasporan Jews to read the Hebrew of the existing Tanak? It is as if you were to translate the Tanak into English and then object when lots of people read it. Keep it in Hebrew, so that you can know that whoever comes to it comes through Hebrew, and thus has absorbed a certain orientation to the language and outlook of the Tanak in original Hebrew?

Pr Chris
This comment has been removed.
06:25 PM on 10/15/2012
God is the author of the Bible. It contains His words.... We should read it that way.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
CanisLupusLogan
I think, therefore I am a progressive liberal.
09:49 PM on 10/15/2012
Wrong. Fallible, males wrote it.
Plus, it's 2000 years old. Time for an upgrade.
12:40 PM on 10/16/2012
You imply female authorship is infallible. You construct a strange and unreal world.

Wrong, not time for an upgrade. Heaven and Earth may pass away but His words will never pass away.

"For as the rain and the snow come down from heaven and return not
But water the earth causing it to spring forth and to bud
Giving seed to the sower and bread to the eater.
So shall my word be that comes forth from my mouth
It shall not return to me void
But it shall accomplish that which I purpose and
It shall prosper in the thing to which I sent it."

Gods words, not mine. Isaiah 55:10
02:57 PM on 10/17/2012
shakespeare is 400 years old. time for an upgrade?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Jerry Frey
unCommon sense for the common good
01:13 AM on 10/17/2012
The Bible is not the verbally inspired inerrant word of God. Jesus was a Teacher of Wisdom, that's why he was called "rabbi."
02:12 AM on 10/17/2012
The Bible claims to be inspired, not inerrant. The terms have entirely different meanings. Claiming the Bible to be inerrant when it is not leads down the wrong rabbit hole.
10:42 AM on 10/17/2012
Jesus was God in human flesh. "Emanuel" - God is with us.
photo
michelesda
My micro-bio is empty.
06:21 PM on 10/15/2012
It must be admitted that the god of Exodus 3-4 looks and sounds an awful lot like a tribal god; I'm sure that that is the way I would have felt as a visiting Anglo-American who happened to be standing there on the mountain with Moses that day. The idea of a god like that as ruler and creator of the universe and all mankind really seems like a stretch.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
TheApostate
blasphemy for a half century
07:42 AM on 10/15/2012
I'd like to see this same methodology used to break down Little Red Riding Hood, Humpty Dumpty, Hey Diddle Diddle the Cat and the Fiddle....lets see what kind of earth shattering conclusions can be made to explain all these shenanigans.....
12:14 PM on 10/15/2012
knock yourself out. let us know what you learn.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
Kamanalonokapu
Greed: root of all evil
04:54 AM on 10/15/2012
Religion is a product of language and cannot exist without language. Language is an invention and, therefore, is artificial and unreal. Everything created by and through the use of language must, likewise, be artificial and unreal. Religion is artificial and unreal.
12:15 PM on 10/15/2012
therefore your post is artificial and unreal.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
Kamanalonokapu
Greed: root of all evil
10:38 AM on 10/17/2012
Language, including posts, is artificial and unreal.
07:51 AM on 10/18/2012
if language is an invention then how does a child learn one without ever having learned a language before? God speaks that why there is language
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
Kamanalonokapu
Greed: root of all evil
09:21 AM on 10/18/2012
God speaks with pictures, images and graphics (as in dreams). She never uses language because using languages is to slow a way to communicate. She can say more with one image than you can say with a thousand words.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
suebeedue
01:01 AM on 10/15/2012
To understand what the name YHWH (Jehovah in English) means, I am surprised that the scholars did not mention that Jehovah is the causative form, the imperfect state of the Hebrew verb "ha-wah'" (become), meaning "He Causes to Become".

They also never mention that this name written in the Tetragrammaton (YHWH or JHWH) in the Scriptures about 7000 times. This name was the most mentioned name in the whole Bible, no other name was used more than Gods name. Obviously the name is extremely important to God himself, he wants us to know him on as personal basis as is possible and to know the name of someone distinguishes him from everyone else. He is not just an impersonal title for us when we know his name. The titles tell us different facets of Jehovah, such as "Creator", "Almighty". "Universal Sovereign", "God", "Heavenly Father etc., but his name Jehovah encompasses all the titles.
07:20 AM on 10/15/2012
Not to offend,  in asking, seeking truth, by Scholars, experts Historical Scholars, etc just an opinion.  If His Name is Important, has great meaning, written told, there is no n other  Name as powerful, or as  mighty under the Heavens as His Name,  seeking not to offend our Our Heavenly Father. Jesus who said." I come in His Name"," I gave them your Name", "One is saved in His Name",  many more written verses, and in OT many also, etc   then why have we changed our Heavenly Father's Name in the first place? We can all say ones Name, no matter what language we speak in, correct? Our Heavenly Fathers was not English? Greek? European? now was He? When seeking experts, God , Lord are Titles- not names are they? Finding out also, that pagans called their deities Gods, Lords, there were many gods lords, were there not  as recorded in History? . Baal means God, Lord does it not? Why was His name replaced with God, Lord and in the Bible then?  For at one time in the OT,  our Heavenly Father always identified himself, when He spoke,, that it was He speaking by first stating His-  Name? said: I will?  Now  replaced with God or Lord, why? Fact, by scholars one will not find  the letter J in the Hebrew Hebrew alphabet , for it does not exist, does it?  One will not find the letter J in the Bible of 1611 even, the English alphabet letter J  still did not exist., did it?  Which the Hebrew language goes by sound also. Each  Hebrew Letter  also represents a meaning, does it not?  Names are very important to Our Father. Name also define ones mission when chosen by  our Heavenly Father also, did not know that.. When seeking truth found out the name Jesus is only 500 years old even, did not know that at all and the alphabet letter J did not exist till the late 1600? Please correct if wrong, with facts, Thank you. Just wondering Yah from Jeh have the same Hebrew meaning, for each letter in Hebrew has great meaning also, thanks please correct if wrong. Thanks  Peace    
08:20 AM on 10/15/2012
I am not sure why you do not understand that names moving across languages, ie..Hebrew, Aramaic, Latin, Greek and English are the same? ex: my name in English is Paul, if I go to Mexico they call me Pablo. It is the same thing w/ the same meaning...no it isn't "Paul" but it is Paul.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
suebeedue
06:34 PM on 10/15/2012
The name has not changed, some Bibles have changed the name and substituted "LORD" in its place. At some point a superstition arose among the Jews that it was wrong to even pronounce the divine name (represented by the Tetragrammaton). Superstitions arose when the Jews disobeyed the Mosaic Law which prohibited divination, magic, sorcery etc. (Deuteronomy 18: 10-12). The nation often disobeyed the Mosaic Law and God would send a prophet to urge the people to change their ways and stick close to the Law.

Some viewed the name as too sacred for imperfect lips to speak. Of course, Satan is the enemy of Jehovah and would like no one to follow the true God, Jehovah, and if he could get many to not even say his name, then this would work towards his goal to hinder people from drawing close to him. But again, clearly God wanted us to know his name. Of course, I speak English and Jehovah is the English translation of the Hebrew Yahweh, just as Jesus is the English translation of the Hebrew Yeshuah. The Y is changed to a J in English.

Hope that helps you sunshine!
photo
CalSailor
Christian, therefore liberal
09:03 PM on 10/18/2012
Except that Jehovah is not a correct translation of the four letter word. The error, in English, is because observant Jews, in reading the Tetragrammaton (YHWH) do not pronounce the name in its covenent form. When they come across this word in the text, they substitute the more generic word Adonai. As time went on, the Tetragrammaton, which was not vowel pointed, took on the vowels of Adonai, usually in the text to the margin. And in English, without realizing the issue, translated the Tetragrammaton as if it had those consonents (JHWH, and the VOWELS of the word Adonai) The result: JahWohai...or, after the W elided into V...Jahovahai...Jehovah. That name is not used in Judaism...

Pr Chris
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Jerry Frey
unCommon sense for the common good
11:43 PM on 10/14/2012
The Old Testament is irrelevant except as it pertains to the New Testament, e.g., Isaiah/faith.
Decide for yourself.

www.napoleonlive.info/judas-the-galilean/
10:33 PM on 10/14/2012
There are various opinions, pro and con, on Lecto Divina. What i do not understand is why, on a religious site, atheists and agnostics try to overtake the comments section to malign a belief in God or scripture. We ave heard them time and again espouse their ideas- why do they insist on bombarding a religious thread ? As a Christian I have never searched for a thread written by unbelievers so that i might denounce their unbelief. I believe that would be a rude waste of time.
03:39 PM on 10/15/2012
it's their version of proselytizing?
05:01 PM on 10/15/2012
BK... funny you should mention that. I've noticed that too. I've peeked in on other discussion threads and it's one big happy family, but here on Christian threads it's overwhelmingly populated by critics and bashers.

But you know what? There more I see attacks on Christianity from all sides, the more secure I am in that it IS the one and only truth. Darkness does not battle darkness, but light.

"For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the powers, against the world forces of this darkness, against the spiritual forces of wickedness in the heavenly places." (Eph. 6:12)

Anyone who doesn't think Satan is real should try fighting against him sometime...
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
libwingoflibwing
Leftist, Christian, Non-Violent Revolutionary
05:35 PM on 10/14/2012
"In The Bible and the Believer, Marc Z. Brettler, Peter Enns, and I explore how biblical scholars from different traditions--Jewish, Evangelical, and Catholic--integrate their historical-critical learning with their ongoing religious commitments."

Why didn't you include Mainline Protestants and Orthodox also?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
07:04 AM on 10/18/2012
Libby, it might be they were of the friendly liberal persuasion and the Mainline Protestants and Orthodox scholars were Conservative Republicans Focusing on the Family

HP usually adds LGBT issues into the Religion section; lead article "Catholic Priest Comes Out As Gay On Facebook"
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
libwingoflibwing
Leftist, Christian, Non-Violent Revolutionary
04:05 PM on 10/18/2012
Mainline Protestants are more likely to be he liberals, it is Evangelicals who are the Focus on the Family Conservative Republicans.

Orthodoxy is as diverse as Catholicism on these issues.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
bbriani3842
400+ yrs of science & STILL no evidence for a god
04:44 PM on 10/14/2012
Start here:

Genesis 32:30 …. John 1:18 & 1 John 4:12
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
soma77
Author, Speaker, Retreat Facilitator
03:27 PM on 10/14/2012
Lectio Divina is a technique to go beyond the mind, not use the mind. It helps one witness in the spirit.