The Interpretation of Scripture The Church, in Her wisdom, has given us direction on how to best interpret Scripture. Following the wisdom of St. Peter, who understood that Scripture is the inspired Word of God, Scripture is not open to personal interpretation, but rather, the interpreter must seek to understand what God wanted known for the sake of our salvation. Therefore, the Church has given us certain criteria to best uncover that understanding. The Church has also understood certain “senses” of Scripture, which help us read the Scripture text with its true meaning in mind.

Three Criteria for Interpreting Scripture Look closely at the content and unity of the whole Scripture How does the rest of Scripture help me understand what I’m reading? Helps to avoid “cherry picking” There are three criteria for interpreting Scripture which come from CCC 112-114. These criteria can be thought of as a spiral or a concentric circles. Interpretation a particular piece of Scripture should begin close up with Scripture itself, then move outwards to Tradition as a whole, and the outwards again to consider the entire unity of the Catholic Faith. Like a spiral, interpretation moves from the center outwards. The first criteria for interpreting Scripture is to look closely at the content and unity of the whole Scripture. In other words, first use Scripture to help interpret itself. We understand that no Scripture passage exists in a vacuum or in isolation. It is connected to every other Scripture passage that has come before it and that comes after it. The footnotes and cross references included in most good Bibles can help with this first criteria by directing the reader to other places in Scripture where the same or other related topics are addressed. While reading Scripture, ask: “How does the rest of Scripture help me understand what I’m reading?” This criteria helps to avoid “cherry picking” when reading Scripture. In other words, “cherry picking” means to try to make a passage of Scripture mean something or say something that is not supported by anything else in the Bible.

Three Criteria for Interpreting Scripture Read the Scripture within “the living Tradition of the whole Church” How does the understanding of the Fathers of the Church, the Saints, and Magisterium of the Church help me understand what I’m reading? The second criteria for interpreting Scripture is to read the Scripture within the living Tradition of the whole Church.” Keeping in mind the spiral analogy, after considering Scripture itself to help interpret a particular passage, next is to consider the Tradition of the Church, that is, the writings of the early Church Fathers, the writings and teachings of the Saints, and the interpretation and teaching of the Magisterium (the official teaching body and authority of the Catholic Church given to Her by Christ). While reading Scripture, ask: “How does the understanding of the Father’s of the Church, the Saints, and Magisterium of the Church help me understand what I’m reading?

Three Criteria for Interpreting Scripture Be attentive to the analogy of faith. Does my understanding make sense in itself? Does it make sense in light of the doctrines and dogmas of the Church and God’s whole plan of salvation? Helps to avoid… The third criteria for interpreting Scripture is to be attentive to the analogy of faith. Continuing the spiral analogy, after considering Scripture itself to help interpret a particular passage, and then the Tradition of the Church, we must next consider the whole of the truths of the Faith themselves. In other words, one must consider whether a particular interpretation of Scripture makes sense in an of itself and within the context of all of the dogmas and doctrines of the Church and the whole of God’s plan for salvation. Sometimes the “analogy of faith” is referred to as the “rule of faith,” but the meaning is the same. While reading Scripture, ask: “Does my understanding make sense in itself? Does it make sense in light of the doctrines and dogmas of the Church and God’s whole plan of salvation?” Offer your students an absurd example to illustrate the three criteria for interpreting Scripture. For example: Imagine that you read a particular passage from Scripture and interpret it to mean that Jesus was actually an alien from Mars and floated around on a purple cloud sprinkling pixie dust on his followers, and that in order to be saved, we must mix the pixie dust in a glass of juice and drink it. or Imagine that you read a particular passage from Scripture and interpret it to mean that Noah built a rocket powered submarine and brought 2 pairs of each animal into it in order to survive the flood. Therefore, we each must build our own submarines and fill it with as many animals as we can and live in the ocean on our submarines in order to be saved. You may create your own absurd example. Then, walk your students through the following thought experiment: How can you check if your interpretation is correct? First, use the Scripture itself. Is there anything in Scripture that supports this interpretation? After an exhaustive examination of Scripture, I am confident the answer is no. Second, compare your interpretation to the Tradition of the Church, the writings of the Church Fathers, the Saints, and the teaching of the Magisterium. Does anything that has been written before or taught by the Church support your interpretation? After an exhaustive examination of the Tradition of the Church, I am confident the answer is no. Last, consider your interpretation within the whole context of the truths of the Faith found in her dogmas and doctrines and in the fullness of God’s plan for salvation. Does anything within the dogmas and doctrines of the Church and God’s plan for salvation support your interpretation? After a thorough examination of the Faith and God’s plan for salvation, I am confident the answer is no. At this points, what conclusions must one draw? My initial interpretation cannot possibly be true. There is nothing that supports it either in Scripture, in Tradition, or in the dogmas and doctrines of the Faith. I must concede that I am wrong and try to correct my incorrect interpretation.

Two Senses of Scripture Literal sense The intention of the Human writers. What the human writers wanted to say Spiritual sense The truth for salvation God wanted written down. What God wanted to say The two senses of Scripture, literal and spiritual, refer to what the human writers wanted to say and what God wanted to say, as both appear in Scripture. Another way to describe the senses of Scripture is the “meaning” of Scripture: the literal meaning and the spiritual meaning. Since God spoke through the human writers of Scripture, we must always be attentive to what the human authors intended to say. The literal sense of Scripture is always present in any given Scripture passage and must always be understood first in order to understand what God wanted to say. The spiritual sense of Scripture refers to the truth for salvation God wanted written down. Sometimes that is easier to determine than others. Ultimately, the spiritual sense is the most important of the senses to understand. This makes sense because God is the primary author of Scripture and we want to know and understand what He wanted to tell us through His Word. The spiritual sense is further divided into three senses: The allegorical sense, the moral sense, and the anagogical sense. Understanding the senses of Scripture are like peeling an onion. There are many layers of an onion, like there are many layers to Scripture that must be unfolded in order to gain a complete understanding.

Three Parts of the Spiritual Sense Allegorical Sense Helps us understand how some of the events of the OT foreshadow Jesus Christ Typology The study of how people, places, things, or ideas earlier in Salvation History foreshadow or point forward to a later person, place, thing, or idea in Salvation History. Type ex. The instructions for Passover in Exodus 12 Typology – The study of how people, places, things, or ideas earlier in Salvation History foreshadow or point forward to a later person, place, thing, or idea in Salvation History. Usually, this means studying how an earlier thing foreshadows Jesus Christ or those close to Him, like Mary. The earlier “person, place, thing, or idea” is called a “type.” A “type” is a kind of stamp. It leaves an imprint of itself upon whatever it is pressed. Ex. A “type-writer” Example: The instructions for Passover in Exodus 12. God gives Moses specific instructions for Passover: Each Israelite family must procure a year-old, unblemished male lamb, slaughter it, roast it, and eat it in a sacred meal consisting of unleavened bread and wine, and spread the lamb’s blood on their door posts so the Angel of Death will pass over their homes that night and spare the first born from death. All of this, of course, foreshadows Jesus as the Lamb of God, who sacrificed Himself for us so that we would be spared death because of sin, and gave His flesh to us to eat in the sacred Eucharist meal. The original Passover is a foreshadowing of the later Passover of Christ.

Three Parts of the Spiritual Sense Moral Sense Teaches us how to act in a right way Also called the Tropological sense ex. Ten Commandments The moral sense teaches us how to live morally, or how to act in a right way, choosing right from wrong. We learn this from the example of people in Scripture whose stories teach us either what to do or what not to do. We also learn this in explicit moral teaching. Example: The Ten Commandments. God give Moses the Ten Commandments as a way of teaching the Israelites how to live rightly and act morally.

Three Parts of the Spiritual Sense Anagogical Sense Helps us to relate what the events of Scripture have to do with our final destiny – heaven. Ex. Judas Maccabeas’ prayers for the dead The Anagogical sense teaches us about our final destiny, which is heaven, and the things of the End (death, judgment, heaven, (purgatory) and hell). This is often done by analogy or visions, or by direct teaching, as in Christ’s teachings of the end. Example: In 2 Maccabees 12, Judas Maccabeus prays for his dead soldiers. This tells us that Judas Maccabeus believed that his prayer would accomplish something in the afterlife. This means that there must be some temporary third state after death, other than heaven or hell, which are each permanent. This third state is purgatory.