June 28, 2024 • 50 mins
In this episode, Father Sanchez emphasizes the necessity of understanding the sacred authors' intentions in their historical and cultural contexts, and we explore how metaphors like the good shepherd or parables like the sower and the seed reveal deeper spiritual insights. Drawing on guidance from the Catechism, we highlight how these interpretations remain relevant and vital for contemporary believers.
The conversation dives deep into the historical and theological development of scriptural interpretation, from allegorical to typological methods. Through examples such as Jonah's story prefiguring Christ, we see how Old Testament events foreshadow New Testament revelations. Father Sanchez explains the balance between allegorical and literal meanings, touching upon historical shifts and the renewed interest in typology within the Catholic tradition. Join us as we enrich our understanding of both Testaments and deepen our appreciation for Scripture's timeless wisdom.
Have something you'd love to hear Fr. Stephen and John talk about? Email us at myfriendthefriar@gmail.com or click here!
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:01):
Welcome to our podcast friends.
Thank you so much for listening.
If you like our podcast andwant to support us, please
subscribe or follow us, andplease don't forget to click the
notification bell so you willbe notified when new episodes
release.
Thank you and God bless.
Speaker 2 (00:26):
Welcome to the podcast.
Thanks for joining me and myfriend the friar, father Stephen
Sanchez, a Discalced CarmelitePriest.
Good morning, father.
Good morning.
How are you?
I am sleepies because Berthawoke me up at it was almost 5
o'clock in the morning and shewas meowing and meowing and
(00:49):
meowing and whenever I,eventually I got out of bed
because I was going to murderher and she scampered away but
then stopped and turned to lookback at me and meowed more, like
in Lassie, you remember back.
Yeah, it's like the littledog's trying to to take you to
the well where billy fell in orsomething.
Yeah, and so I was.
(01:10):
I'm half asleep.
I'm like, oh my gosh, what'sgoing on bertha, what is it?
And she's like me.
I'm down the hallway so Ifollow her.
She stops, turns, looks back.
Yeah, I follow her her waterbowl her food bowl was empty and
I just thought you'd like toknow yeah, I was.
(01:31):
I was trying to be calm aboutit and I was just like you know
what, if I fight it, I'm nevergoing back to sleep.
So I fed her, but by the time Iwas done putting food in the
bowl, it was over.
Speaker 1 (01:44):
I was up Too late.
Speaker 2 (01:46):
So, yeah, but she was very happy and she was very
thankful that I fed her when shewas starving to death at five
in the morning.
Speaker 1 (01:54):
Because they never eat poor things.
Speaker 2 (01:57):
Oh man, so I'm all right.
How are you?
Speaker 1 (02:02):
I'm well.
Thank you, I'm well.
Speaker 2 (02:04):
You've been busy, man , yeah.
Speaker 1 (02:10):
We'll just leave it at that.
Speaker 2 (02:11):
Yeah, yeah.
God is good.
Can you imagine what kind ofworthless human you'd be if you
were just bored all the time?
Speaker 1 (02:20):
Yeah, but sometimes it's worth considering, you know
.
Speaker 2 (02:28):
Oh, my goodness.
Okay, so you wanted to talkabout typology because it was
something we had brought up inone of our previous episodes the
whole storm and Jonah and thegarden full of weeds and stuff
like that.
Right and I'm very excited aboutthis and I don't know if we
(02:52):
maybe we'll have time at the endwe can kind of get into it or
maybe it'll be another episodethat we'll write down and forget
that we wrote down.
But on a similar kind of topic,betty was asking me the other
day about the symbolic nature ofnumbers in the Bible like three
and seven and six and twelveand yeah, all that, and so with
(03:15):
that, I guess very roughly, isthat a typology as well, no,
that wouldn't be typology.
Speaker 1 (03:22):
No, that'd be another kind of like uh, that'd be more
in terms of symbols, like whatis the number seven, right?
So what is number three, numberfour, uh, six, those things
that they're, that they.
And in jewish mysticism andjewish, there is a little
(03:42):
sidetrack there that withinJudaism there is this whole
thing that's kind of obsessedwith numbers, right, and so
whatever, I mean, I'm notstudied in that, so I don't want
to say anything other than that.
But yeah, this typology isdifferent.
(04:03):
The reason I wanted to bring itup was because the last time we
were talking say anything otherthan that.
But yeah, this typology isdifferent.
Yeah, the reason I wanted tobring it up was because the last
time we were talking, as youmentioned, you had brought up
that Bishop Barron had stirredup some of your considerations
and ponderings.
And going back to that, likeyou mentioned the idea of the
storm in the Book of Jonah, howBishop Barron presented the idea
(04:30):
or the suggestion that maybethe storm was a corrective to
Jonah's refusal to obey God'sword.
Right, and so the last time, aswe were going through that and
you were presenting yourreflections or your ideas on
that, I was thinking like hmm,maybe we should do a little bit
(04:54):
on the senses of scripture,because we had talked before a
little bit about typology, right, A little bit and we've touched
on that.
So I thought, maybe, followingup on that last episode, to do
something on the four senses ofscripture and open up the
Pandora's box on typology.
Speaker 2 (05:10):
Yeah Well, I'm glad that you want to, because it is
really easy.
We've talked about this before.
It is really easy with when youare your own magisterium.
It is really easy to kind of gooff into left field and people
are like how did you get there?
Speaker 1 (05:27):
You know what I mean.
Yeah, like David Koresh in Waco.
Speaker 2 (05:32):
Yeah, so there is the church in its wisdom knows how
and I guess, how to interpreteverything, and we need to be
careful that we are mindful ofthis and it's it's not bad per
se to explore these thoughts onyour own, but we want to make
(05:54):
sure that we are.
Speaker 1 (05:57):
Um, we go home every time right, we don't just keep
wandering off right, right.
And so what I want to do is Iwanted to touch a little bit on
that kind of stuff because thereis that danger, right, and then
there's, you know, later onwe'll probably do so write this
down and then forget that.
We write it down on LectioDivina when we start talking
(06:17):
about prayer, right?
Speaker 2 (06:18):
So this is a little bit different from that.
Speaker 1 (06:42):
But before I talk on the four senses of Scripture and
a little intro to typology, Iwant to recall the teaching of
the Second Vatican Council onthe Constitution on Divine
Revelation, which was entitledDe Verbum of God's Word, right
God's Word.
So in chapter 3 of that document, chapter 3 is entitled Sacred
Scripture, its Inspiration andDivine Interpretation.
Number 12 of chapter 3 states,however, since God speaks in
sacred Scripture through men, inhuman fashion, the interpreter
(07:09):
of Sacred Scripture, in order tosee clearly what God wants to
communicate to us, shouldcarefully investigate what
meaning the sacred writersreally intended and what God
wanted to manifest by means oftheir words.
(07:29):
And I think it's important forus to remember this, because
just the other day we were atlunch and Father Jim says you'll
never believe what they askedme during Bible studying, like
what Father he says so in theBible you know where are
dinosaurs and did dinosaurs?
(07:52):
And did Adam name dinosaurs orsomething Like okay, so yeah, we
talked a little bit about howwe're trying to explain that the
Bible is not a chronologicalhistory but sacred history and
the differences between that andso anyway, and then after we
(08:13):
had you and I had talked aboutthe Bishop Barron thing, like I
think we should probably saysomething about the four senses
of scripture.
So, anyway, getting back to thisconstitution, so it's a matter
of what did the person, what didthe sacred author intend to
(08:35):
communicate?
Right?
And since this is a divineinspiration and he or God, I
should say God is inspiring ahuman instrument, then the human
instrument only has humanrealities that he can use to try
(08:56):
to understand what it is thatGod is saying or trying to say.
Right, and only has thoselimited human realities by which
the author can communicate theinspiration.
So, humanity, today, in ourcentury, our knowledge and
understanding of the world isvery, very, very, very different
(09:18):
from the first century, and sothe human reality has changed,
understanding has changed, so wehave other ways of explaining
or using our understanding ofthe world in a different way.
Right?
So that's part of theunderstanding too, that there is
this idea of what is it thatthe script, the sacred author,
(09:42):
was trying to communicate to usand what were the tools he had
available.
Okay, yeah.
Speaker 2 (09:49):
Is this?
I guess a good example would belike when we covered the book
of Revelation.
He's speaking very it's like Idon't know what the word I'm
looking for.
It's culturally andhistorically relevant things
that are going on in his time atthat time.
(10:10):
But then there's also moreright.
Speaker 1 (10:13):
Because, it's.
Speaker 2 (10:14):
Inspired.
Or maybe the way people wouldtry to describe angels with like
a million eyeballs or somethinglike that they're using what
they understand to try todescribe something.
Speaker 1 (10:26):
Right, yeah, so this is part of it, right?
So in the Catechism Numbers 115through 119, the Catechism
touches on these senses ofScripture.
Senses of scripture.
(10:48):
So first, really quick, overall, in sacred scripture we see
that there's a literal sense anda spiritual sense, right, so
the spiritual sense itself thencan be subdivided into three
other senses.
So the four senses of scripturethen are literal what is
written down, and then thespiritual sense then would be
(11:11):
senses, would be allegorical,moral and anagogical.
Okay, we'll talk about that injust a minute.
So literal, what the sacredauthor wrote and what he
intended to convey to us in thatwriting, including the
(11:32):
metaphors that he used to conveyhis message, for example, I am
the good shepherd.
So the literal sense, then, isthe meaning conveyed by the
words of Scripture anddiscovered by exegesis.
Exegesis is the study of theword structure and the content,
(11:55):
the historical content.
Who was writing it?
What were they trying to convey?
That's part of the wholeexegesis of Scripture, right,
following the rules of soundinterpretation, all other senses
of sacred Scripture are basedon the literal.
So when Jesus says I am the goodshepherd, does that mean that
(12:16):
Jesus was an actual shepherd?
No, wait, a minute.
Wasn't he a carpenter.
So was he a carpenter and ashepherd?
No, he's using a metaphor,right, and so that's part of
literary expression, that's partof human expression, and so
trying to understand that thereis the use of metaphor.
(12:36):
So sometimes the literal isdifferent from, I guess, what we
would call strictly fundamentalthe letter of the written word.
Right, this actually means whatit says.
There is no sign or symbol ormetaphors being used, right?
Speaker 2 (12:56):
So… yeah, so I can see that being tricky for some
people who interpret things onlyliterally.
Think of certain Christiangroups.
Where it's the Bible, it isliteral, only Right.
Speaker 1 (13:10):
For example, there's two creation stories in Genesis,
so does that mean that there'stwo parallel universes?
Speaker 2 (13:16):
I mean is that what that?
Speaker 1 (13:17):
means.
Speaker 2 (13:20):
And this is also did I hear you right, or did I
understand you right, thateverything else has to be based
off of the literal meaning first, yeah, what is the author
attempting to say?
Speaker 1 (13:41):
What is the audience that the author is addressing?
Right, those are the literal,that's the literal basis, and
then from there we have thespiritual understanding, because
God's Word is life-giving andthere is a truth there.
There is an absolute truth inthe Scripture that we're
(14:02):
attempting to understand.
In the scripture that we'reattempting to understand, how is
that abiding truth applicableto our life today as a believing
community?
So that's part of that wholeliteral sense.
First, I have to understandwho's talking to what, and okay,
so then how does that apply?
(14:23):
What is the truth there that'sstill applicable to us in the
present day that we findourselves in?
Speaker 2 (14:31):
Yeah, would this be the same way, not just with
Scripture, but the same way youshould learn from Jesus'
parables?
Speaker 1 (14:38):
Yes.
Speaker 2 (14:38):
Okay.
Speaker 1 (14:39):
So a parable, again, is a literary device, right?
So what is Jesus trying toteach us through this literary
device?
There's something here thathe's trying to get across to us,
for example, the whole idea ofthe seed that is cast on stony
ground, the thorns, the goodsoil, the shallow soil right.
(15:02):
Ground the thorns, the goodsoil, the shallow soil right.
Is it really a lesson ongardening?
Or what is it that he's tryingto get across to us, right?
And so there's this whole idea,then, that there is this device
, this literary device that theLord is trying to explain to us.
One, I think, for example, inthat parable, is God's
(15:24):
generosity.
Generosity meaning he'sgenerous, he doesn't measure
Himself out, right?
If you would think about that,to sow the seed, you would go
and prepare, because you'dprepare the soil, because you
want to make sure that everyseed has the real, the great
opportunity, or a greateropportunity to germinate.
(15:44):
And here in the parables, like.
God is so generous, he's justcontinuously scattering his
mercy, his love, his inspiration.
So again, that's part of thatliterary device of the parable.
Speaker 2 (16:00):
All right, so that makes sense.
What's the allegorical then?
Speaker 1 (16:03):
So the allegorical in the Catechism number 117,.
The Catechism tells us we canacquire a more profound
understanding of events byrecognizing their significance
in Christ.
Thus the crossing of the RedSea, when Israel comes out of
(16:27):
Egypt, right, the crossing ofthe Red Sea is a sign or type of
Christ's victory and also ofChristian baptism.
Okay, so we have to be carefulhere.
The allegory is not arbitrary,so that each reader can attempt
(16:48):
to apply whatever value orinterpretation that they want to
the Scripture verse, right, butthat the allegory is something
that is inspired or illuminatedby faith and discovers Christ in
all of Scripture.
That is so in allegory.
I'm always looking forsomething that connects to
(17:11):
Christ, something that points toChrist.
I'm always looking for that.
That is the allegory.
So, for example, crossing theRed Sea, it's like well, okay,
the Red Sea, red River.
So if we cross the Red River wego into Oklahoma or from
Oklahoma to Texas.
No, that's not it, because ithas to point back to the literal
(17:34):
interpretation it points backto the literal interpretation,
and the allegorical is alwayslooking for some connection to
Christ, right?
So then crossing the Red Sea,right?
So it'd be like, okay, that'dbe like.
(17:55):
The allegory would be that thatis like baptism, in that, just
as Israel came out of Egypt fromslavery, for us baptism is
coming away from the slavery tosin, from that death of slavery
to the life of the new people,right, the people that God is
redeeming.
So we would see, then, thecrossing of the Red Sea as a
(18:15):
type—I'm going to go a littlebit—I'm going to jump ahead a
little bit a type of baptism,right?
So, okay, we'll touch back onthat in a minute.
So that's the allegorical, sothe moral sense.
(18:36):
The catechism tells us again innumber 117, the events reported
in Scripture ought to lead us toact justly.
So that's the moral sense.
How does this help me to live amoral life?
How does this help me in mymorality?
As St Paul says, they arewritten for our instruction.
(18:59):
So if we have found theallegorical sense of the
scripture, the consequenceshould be that I commit to
living what I have discovered.
That is what is the moralconsequence of the allegorical
sense.
It is the life that flows forthfrom the life itself.
So, in the allegory of crossingthe Red Sea and it is the
(19:24):
allegory of baptism going fromdeath, enslavement to sin, to
new life in Christ, then themoral sense would be what is the
moral implication then ofliving the new life?
How do I free myself from theslavery of sin now that I am
(19:47):
enjoying the freedom of the sonsof God, or I've been adopted in
Jesus Christ through baptism?
Right?
Speaker 2 (19:54):
Yeah, and the moral life is not a subjective set of
morals, depending on our cultureand circumstance or whatever it
is the objective truth offollowing Jesus.
Speaker 1 (20:06):
Right, so.
And the moral virtues?
Right, and you can look that upin the catechism as well.
So then, the fourth sense ofthe scripture.
So you have the literal.
Then you have the allegorical,which is looking for some
connection to Christ or Christ'slife, the Christ event.
(20:27):
And then you have the moral,which is, somehow, how does that
Christ event, how does thattruth of Christ reflect in my
moral life, how do I grow invirtue, how do I live a good
life?
And then you have what is knownas the anagogical sense, and in
number 117, again, of theCatechism.
(20:49):
The Catechism tells us we canview realities and events in
terms of their eternalsignificance, leading us toward
our true home.
Thus, the church on earth is asign of the heavenly Jerusalem.
In other words, another way oflooking at the anagogical is how
does this point me towards theeschaton, towards the end times,
(21:13):
right to that final fulfillment, right, so then?
Okay, so, living a moral lifebecause of my baptism.
But now that means that livinga moral life or living a
virtuous life, that this ispointing me beyond the temporal
reality, to that heavenlyJerusalem, to glory, to heaven
(21:33):
whichever word you want to useto the beatific vision that it
helps me to see that there is alife beyond the temporal reality
that I perceive right, thatthere is eternal life that I am
striving for, right.
So that's the anagogical.
(21:55):
How does this help me thenachieve or move or work towards
that eschatological reality?
Right, excuse me, in the number118 of the Catechism this is the
way that the Catechism kind ofsummarizes this the letter, or
(22:19):
the literal sense.
The letter speaks of deeds.
Allegory speaks of or speaks tofaith.
The moral speaks to action.
How do I act?
The anagogy speaks to ourdestiny as God's children.
Speaker 2 (22:44):
That's really interesting.
That's something worth chewingon.
Can you just repeat that?
I think you could take theEucharist and look at it like
this right, you could take lotsof things, but you got to follow
this kind of formula, right,right.
Speaker 1 (23:05):
And so, like the catechism says and this is kind
of like the way the catechismsummarizes these four senses,
right.
So the catechism says theletter speaks of deeds, allegory
to faith, the moral, how to act, anagaji, our destiny.
(23:25):
In other words, okay.
So what is the literal, theletter, what is the literal
thing that we are reading?
What is it that the sacredauthor is communicating to us?
So how does this help me in myfaith?
What is the faith lesson that Ican take from this sacred
scripture?
(23:45):
Then, how do I act?
After I understand what I'mreading, after I understand the
faith aspect of it?
How do I act?
That's the moral sense, right?
And then how does this help meachieve my destiny, which is to
come to eternal life with JesusChrist, in communion with Father
(24:07):
, son and Spirit?
Speaker 2 (24:09):
Can you take this now and break down, jonah Okay.
Speaker 1 (24:14):
So Jonah it depends what part of Jonah we're talking
about, but since Bishop Barronhad brought this up, okay, so
the overall teaching need toappease the gods.
And then Jonah says, oh, it'smy fault because I'm running
(24:49):
from God and he's like what?
And so then they said that's it.
And they say we're sorry, butwe have to throw you overboard.
And he goes I understand, goahead, throw me overboard.
They throw him overboard andthe sea's calm, the ship is
saved, the sea's calm, the shipis saved, the people don't die.
And then Jonah's swallowed by awhale.
Okay, so let's look at that.
So that is the deed.
(25:10):
So the deed is what that, asBishop Barron had brought up,
that the possibility of thisbeing corrective, that, as Jonah
is running from God, refusingto do or refusing to accept his
vocation, right, his call, thatis the letter.
(25:32):
So, and then the allegory, orhow does this, how does this
point to Christ?
Because again, it has to bepoint to Christ and to faith
Point to Christ?
Because again, it has to bepoint to Christ and to faith.
So we say then, if the storm isthe corrective, then can we say
(25:57):
that Christ's incarnation isthe corrective.
And so then is Jonah a type ofhere we're going to typology.
Is Jonah a type of the fallenAdam or the disobedient Adam?
And so, to correct thedisobedient Adam, god sends his
word into the world.
Which is this corrective storm,right, that's the faith.
(26:20):
Storm, right, that's the faith.
And then the morality is thenwell, does that mean that I
should do my best to not resistGod's Word, not resist what God
is asking of me?
That is the morality, right.
And so, then, that would leadme to my destiny as a faithful
(26:43):
covenant person, or person beingfaithful to the covenant that
we have in Israel or thecovenant that we have in Jesus
Christ, right?
So there's different ways ofbeing able to apply that, then,
to that particular aspect of thestory of Jonah.
Okay, I see wheels turning.
What's going on?
Speaker 2 (27:01):
No, no, it's good, it's good.
This is a really good formula.
I'm surprised surprised thatthe church has some good stuff
in helping you to understandwhat's going on in all these
stories, Because some of thesestories are especially the Old
Testament ones are wild, right,Like the book of Job.
(27:24):
It's like bananas.
But if you take this formulaand you go back and read it, you
probably end up going oh, Algoasi, yes, so going back to the
allegorical sense of scriptureand the storm in the book of
(27:48):
Jonah.
Speaker 1 (27:50):
Okay, so, just as I just did that, right now there
is also what is known astypology.
This is where we open Pandora'sbox, in both biblical
interpretations and therefore intheology as well.
We can say that typology, thisidea of typology, goes back to
(28:12):
the apostles' encounter with therisen Lord.
We are told that Jesus openedtheir minds to the Scriptures.
It's not like they didn't knowthe Scriptures.
They knew the Scriptures, butobviously there's something in
the Scriptures that they didn'tunderstand.
There's some meaning in theScriptures that he needed to
(28:35):
open their minds to, tounderstand who he was as Messiah
.
Right, he was able to point outto them those parts of the
Scripture that apply to him asMessiah and the connection to
the Paschal Mystery.
Then we can say that typologyis the doctrine or the theory
(28:58):
that connects the Old and theNew Testaments.
So we as Catholic Christians, weas a church, we profess that
the Old Testament was apreparation for the New
Testament, was a preparation forthe New Testament, and that the
Old Testament is fulfilled inthe New Testament and that they
are inseparable.
(29:19):
Right, so we need both.
So in typology.
So we've already talked aboutthe senses, the four senses of
Scripture.
So now in typology, which isthen that other layer that you
can add to the four senses.
So in typology, situations,events, persons found in the Old
(29:46):
Testament are understood to betypes that prefigure and are
superseded by antitypes that arethe events or aspects of Christ
or Christ's revelation asdescribed in the New Testament.
So the antitype would be thefulfillment of the type right.
(30:06):
So Jonah.
Going back to Jonah, the personof Jonah could be seen as a
type of Christ.
When Jonah emerges from thebelly of the whale, he would
appear to rise from the dead, ordeath right from the whale's
belly as is definitively seen inChrist's resurrection after
(30:31):
being in the belly of the earthor the belly of death.
So that is how Jonah, then,could be a type of Christ, and
Christ would be the anti-typeright, the fulfillment of the
type right, yeah, that makes alot of sense, because it was
three days and three days too,wasn't it?
Speaker 2 (30:49):
Yeah, yeah.
Speaker 1 (30:51):
And so other common typological allegories entail
the four major Old Testamentprophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah,
Ezekiel and Daniel, and thetypology is that they prefigure,
or they're types of, theanti-types, which are the four
evangelists, Matthew, Mark, Lukeand John, or type again, the 12
(31:23):
tribes of Israel were the typeof the foreshadowing of the 12
apostles and they're thereforethe new Israel.
So commentators could findcountless analogies between
stories of the Old Testament andthe New Testament.
Modern typologists prefer tolimit themselves to considering
typological relationships thatthey find between the New
Testament itself, not outside ofthe scriptures.
(31:44):
Right, the sacred scriptures,for example Jonah.
Right, Because sometimes peopleget caught up in typologies and
so all of a sudden, like I saidearlier, you become David
Koresh in Waco and you've gotall sorts of stuff going on that
has nothing to do with Jesus,right, yeah, or the scriptures.
(32:04):
So then this way of approachingthe scripture was seen in the
early church.
The early church, Paul himself,in his letter to the Romans,
calls Adam a type of the one whowas to come, and that's in
Romans 5.14.
The early church fathers see inthe passion of Christ the
(32:29):
antitype, or the fulfillment ofseveral Old Testament events or
persons.
Adam is a type of Christ Eve isa type of the church.
The tree of knowledge points tothe tree of life, which is the
cross.
Eve was taken from Adam's sideduring his sleep.
(32:50):
The church is born from thesight of Christ, while he sleeps
in death.
Speaker 2 (32:56):
So all those are different Because, yeah, because
everything's got to point backto Jesus.
Correct In the allegory part.
Correct.
Speaker 1 (33:04):
Correct, correct, correct, correct, okay, for
example, another one is in theGospel of John, mary Magdalene
encounters Jesus in the garden.
So it goes back to it's thefirst day of the week.
It goes back to the garden, soit goes back to day one of
Genesis.
(33:24):
This is now the new creation,and Jesus is in the garden and
Jesus is the gardener.
And so now, we have.
All that is part of thattypology, right?
Speaker 2 (33:34):
so that's how that, that's yeah, that's really well,
it's really creative, it'sreally imaginative.
Right, it's gripping, becauseanytime you connect dots
somewhere, your little lightbulb turns on over your head,
right, you're like oh, oh yeah,exactly.
Speaker 1 (33:52):
So that's part of the whole typology thing, right?
So, going back then to thiswhole idea of typology, one can
say and understand that thefirst community of believers was
struggling with what to make ofthe scriptures as they knew
them, because now they had beenfulfilled in the coming of the
(34:15):
Messiah.
Like, okay, now, since we'vebeen waiting, these hundreds and
hundreds and hundreds andhundreds of years we've been
anticipating, we've been prayingthat the Messiah come, that the
Messiah come, the Messiah come,and all of a sudden the Messiah
is here and you're like okay,so now, what do we do?
Now?
What is the purpose ofScripture?
Now, what is the value ofScripture?
(34:36):
Right?
So then you know, as thecommunity is struggling with the
role and the purpose ofScripture, this is how we have
Jesus opening the mind of theapostles to the Scripture and
that they are necessary for usto understand exactly who Jesus
is as Messiah, that he is thefulfillment of all these
promises.
Right, the early church sawthat the scripture was that
(35:00):
prophesied the coming of theChrist and his paschal mystery.
Now they understand.
Speaker 2 (35:05):
Oh, so, okay, now I see there's different areas in
this scripture that touch uponthat right, that understanding
and they from the from in thebible and extra biblical sources
from the early christians, youcan tell how highly regarded um
(35:29):
scripture was still right and,like paul says it's, it's uh, of
course I'll butcher it um, it'sgood for teaching and, yes,
reproof and all that kind ofstuff right like this.
So, but only because there'snow, as they go through and read
this sacred scripture, thisinspired word, they're seeing
(35:50):
how it is all being fulfilled inJesus.
So I guess that man, I bet theallegory of it all was probably
so exciting to them as they gottogether and they would kind of
open up the word and everyone'slittle minds would just right
and we take it for granted,probably.
Speaker 1 (36:11):
Oh yeah, that's unfortunate, but, yes, that's
very true.
So we could say, then, thattypology can also be seen as a
theory of history of theJudeo-Christian community is
(36:39):
shaped by God, with symbolicevents occurring that act as
types of later events like, as Isaid before, is the journey.
We could say that the journeyof Israel through the desert,
then, can be very much a type ofthe journey of the church, the
believing church today, as wewander through the desert of the
world that does not believe,right?
So just as Israel struggled inthe desert, so we're struggling
(37:01):
in the desert, right?
So just as Israel was tempted,we're tempted.
Just as Israel rebelled,sometimes we tend to rebel.
So those are sort of thatparadigm that has been set
before us of that typology ofsalvation history.
So this whole approach toscriptures and understanding
(37:22):
salvation history, it developedall through the early church and
well into the 1300s.
There came about even a systemduring the medieval times and
the system that was attemptingto understand what seemed to be
(37:43):
discontinuities between the Oldand the New Testament.
So what about the holocausts?
What about the high priest andwhat about this and what about
that?
All those different things, therituals and the sin offerings
and the ark and all those things, right?
So how does this make sense,right?
So there's a whole system thatwas trying to bring these things
(38:08):
to conciliation with each other, to conciliation with each
other.
So the church revered andreveres both the Old Testament
and the New as inspired.
And in the Middle Ages, thetheologians began to discern
allegories in the Old Testamentthat foreshadowed the events of
(38:28):
the New Testament, for examplethe sacrifice of Isaac as a type
of the crucifixion of Jesus.
So you have these typologies,right, these signs, and Jesus
being the antitype or thefulfillment of that type.
And Paul himself speaks of theexistence of allegory and types,
(38:51):
right?
Which then goes back to thiswhole idea.
That goes contrary to thiswhole fundamentalist, literalist
interpretation of Scripture,because Paul himself, in his
letter to the Colossians, saysin chapter two of the Colossians
, verses 16 and 17,.
Paul says, therefore, do notlet anyone judge you by what you
(39:12):
eat or drink, referring to thepurity laws, right, the food
purity laws or with regard to areligious festival.
So why aren't you keeping theJewish festivals right A new
moon celebration or a Sabbathday?
These are a shadow of thethings that were to come.
(39:34):
The reality, however, is foundin Christ.
Speaker 2 (39:41):
So something that pops in my head is how exciting
intellectually all these littlekind of connections are are.
But I can see like a bit of atrap here is, or a danger is, if
you get caught up in step two,the allegory, and you start
(40:06):
there, you start just looking atthe allegories, then you're
passing up all of the literalmeaning of the Old Testament
scripture and the New Testamentscripture, the Old Testament
scripture and the New Testamentscripture, Right, right and then
again so, for example, one ofthe things that I always get
into a discussion withliteralists, where the scripture
says if your right hand is thecause of sin, cut it off.
Speaker 1 (40:32):
If it's your left hand, pluck it out right.
Left eye, pluck it out right.
So that's the literal.
And then again, another literalis John says if you say you
have no sin, then you're a liar.
It's like, okay, so if you're afundamentalist and you're a
literalist, you are a sinner.
But then so why?
You know, you have both yourhands, you have both your eyes.
(40:54):
So what?
Explain to me, right?
Speaker 2 (41:01):
Yeah, yeah, you're either.
Well, yeah, because you'restuck you're lying.
Speaker 1 (41:06):
Yes, exactly.
Speaker 2 (41:07):
Exactly Because you can't be without sin.
So you're lying.
Exactly so you're a liar.
Speaker 1 (41:11):
So okay, so then, what?
So again, and so this is partof the problem that can happen
is that we can misinterpretsomething that the Lord is
bringing to us.
Something might strike me,something might inspire me, and
so then it's a matter of okay.
So what is this?
Is this the Spirit wants me toponder this?
(41:32):
Is this something here for meas an individual in my own
journey?
Do I see how this is connectedto Christ and the Christ event,
and do I see how this is askingof me?
Then you know what is the moralchallenge, the challenge to
virtue, the challenge to morallife, and then how does this
help me to move towards my endgoal, which is life in communion
(41:59):
with the Trinity in the nextlife?
Right, so all this is againsomething that has to be
balanced, right, it's aboutbalance in understanding the
literal, the allegorical, themoral, the anagogical.
Right, this is part of theprocess, and in the typology,
you have to be careful aboutgetting—it's about looking for
(42:22):
types that don't exist.
Right, or looking for typesunder every rock.
Right, like you have to becareful.
Right, use discretion.
And so then this leads to one ofthe problems that came with
this as it entered deeper intothe church.
And then what happened was,after the Protestant revolution,
(42:44):
all of a sudden everybody wasseeing all types of typologies
everywhere and interpretingthings and da-da-da-da, and so,
you know, it all became crazy.
So, again, this was a veryprominent teaching or
catechizing tool typologies upuntil the 13th and other
(43:04):
Protestant leaders, especiallythe Puritans, in a very radical
way dove headfirst into thesetypological interpretations.
And so what happened was, inthe church, the Catholic church,
(43:26):
like okay, let's just step backfrom this a little bit and let
them this has been co-opted bythe Protestants, right.
And so the church says let'sjust step back a little bit from
this, right.
And so we still have a lot ofthe teachings from the old
church fathers, the early churchfathers, in terms of typologies
(43:46):
, and even nowadays we'reregaining this sense of typology
and re-entering into this ideaof the paradigm that has been
set for us in Jesus Christ andHis paschal mystery.
Speaker 2 (44:00):
Mm-hmm, that's an interesting.
That last little bit isinteresting to me because I know
that there are a lot ofProtestant denominations, if you
want to call them that, or youknow what's the phrase you use
instead of church.
Speaker 1 (44:22):
Communities, faith, traditions.
Speaker 2 (44:23):
Communities.
There you go, Communities.
Yeah, so there's differentnon-Catholic faith communities,
right, who don't even read fromthe Old Testament.
Speaker 1 (44:31):
No.
Speaker 2 (44:32):
Like everything's just New Testament, Right.
But then and I've back in theday, I tried to attend a bunch
of different churches, right,because I was searching, and
something that I kind of noticedis that it seemed very
interesting how the preachingcan a lot of times feel like it
was very tailored for me somehow, lot of times feel like it was
(44:55):
very tailored for me somehow.
And then I'm like, wow, how isit that it always seems to have
some kind of application to me?
Now, part of that is becausesacred scripture is good stuff,
right, but it's also becauseit's all allegory, but it's
starting with the New Testamentand it's trying to connect to my
life instead of connecting toJesus.
Speaker 1 (45:22):
So, instead of the literal connecting to Jesus,
connecting to moral, so it wasgoing from literal to moral and
skipping the allegory.
Speaker 2 (45:33):
Yeah, or it was just allegory between what could be
going on in my life, so it'svery generalized, that kind of
like you're casting a reallybroad net here so that anybody
who's listening can find someway to allegorically connect to
it.
Speaker 1 (45:48):
Right.
Speaker 2 (45:49):
But you're missing the literal part Right.
You're missing the literal partRight, and so I wonder is it
helpful or is it not worth it Idon't want to say dangerous, but
not worth it when you'retalking with one of our
non-Catholic Christian brothersand sisters, is it helpful to
try to use typology when you'retrying to find common ground
(46:12):
with them you know what I meanor is it something that you
should try to use sparingly?
Speaker 1 (46:18):
Well, I think, first, it would depend upon what faith
community or what faithtradition they come from, right,
what is their basis?
Right, what is their basic,fundamental understanding of
salvation history?
And secondly, which issomething that I've always
stated and will state until Istand before the throne, is the
(46:39):
radical difference between usand Protestants is Protestants
hold to personal interpretation,and so then that means that,
even though I speak to aProtestant about what the church
teaches, according to theirunderstanding of scripture, it's
(46:59):
like, no, okay, that's a goodidea, but it's what I make it to
be, it's my understanding.
That is essential, right, andthere's where the problem comes,
right.
So, yeah, there's that huge,it's a huge chasm between us and
them, because there is adifference between the
(47:20):
interpretation of Scripture ashas been handed on to us by
apostolic tradition and oraltradition.
Right Versus no.
This is what I interpret it tobe.
One of the big abusers of thatthat I just mentioned earlier
was Koresh, david Koresh, hisinterpretation of the Psalms,
his interpretation of this heclaimed himself to be the
(47:43):
Messiah, he claimed himself tobe the new Christ, he used
scripture and because, again,there is no guardrails I mean,
it's what I say, it is.
Speaker 2 (48:05):
Yeah, so maybe it's a good way to try to understand
what someone else is.
Speaker 1 (48:13):
I mean, I think it's great if you could just explain
this is the way we see it, thisis the way we understand it.
There are these four senses ofscripture and there's also this
typology, and this is the way weinterpret it and, however you
do, it is the way you do it, butthis is the way that we have
since the very beginning.
And you can even quote Paul,right?
(48:35):
It's in Scripture.
So even Paul himself talksabout types, right?
So I think that's a good placeto start and it might start some
thinking in the other personand their approach to Scripture.
Speaker 2 (48:54):
Yeah, man, this has been helpful and I want to.
It makes you.
It makes me want to go andreread a lot of the parables or
pay attention in at massslightly differently, right,
just again using this formula,trying to understand.
(49:14):
You know what's been going on,and maybe even not in a judging
way, but see how the homily isconstructed right Because.
I think it's probably a helpfulway for the priests and deacons
to reach.
Speaker 1 (49:33):
Yeah, so are they focusing on all four senses, or
the other scripture, or just onesense of the scripture?
And so I mean, yeah, it's their, their, their approach to to
how to present that.
Speaker 2 (49:45):
Yeah, super cool.
Speaker 1 (49:47):
Well, thanks for this .
You're welcome.
You're the one that's going tospark this.
I go like I better do somethingabout that.
Speaker 2 (49:54):
Yeah, well, I'm going to go run amok then and see
what else I can inspire you toteach on.
All right, everyone thanks forjoining us.
Father thanks for playing.
Thank you, god bless, I loveyou.
Love you and everyone.
We'll see you later.
Hasta later, Bye.
Welcome to our podcast friends.
Thank you so much for listening.
If you like our podcast andwant to support us, please
subscribe or follow us, andplease don't forget to click the
notification bell so you willbe notified when new episodes
release.
Thank you and God bless.
Speaker 2 (00:26):
Welcome to the podcast.
Thanks for joining me and myfriend the friar, father Stephen
Sanchez, a Discalced CarmelitePriest.
Good morning, father.
Good morning.
How are you?
I am sleepies because Berthawoke me up at it was almost 5
o'clock in the morning and shewas meowing and meowing and
(00:49):
meowing and whenever I,eventually I got out of bed
because I was going to murderher and she scampered away but
then stopped and turned to lookback at me and meowed more, like
in Lassie, you remember back.
Yeah, it's like the littledog's trying to to take you to
the well where billy fell in orsomething.
Yeah, and so I was.
(01:10):
I'm half asleep.
I'm like, oh my gosh, what'sgoing on bertha, what is it?
And she's like me.
I'm down the hallway so Ifollow her.
She stops, turns, looks back.
Yeah, I follow her her waterbowl her food bowl was empty and
I just thought you'd like toknow yeah, I was.
(01:31):
I was trying to be calm aboutit and I was just like you know
what, if I fight it, I'm nevergoing back to sleep.
So I fed her, but by the time Iwas done putting food in the
bowl, it was over.
Speaker 1 (01:44):
I was up Too late.
Speaker 2 (01:46):
So, yeah, but she was very happy and she was very
thankful that I fed her when shewas starving to death at five
in the morning.
Speaker 1 (01:54):
Because they never eat poor things.
Speaker 2 (01:57):
Oh man, so I'm all right.
How are you?
Speaker 1 (02:02):
I'm well.
Thank you, I'm well.
Speaker 2 (02:04):
You've been busy, man , yeah.
Speaker 1 (02:10):
We'll just leave it at that.
Speaker 2 (02:11):
Yeah, yeah.
God is good.
Can you imagine what kind ofworthless human you'd be if you
were just bored all the time?
Speaker 1 (02:20):
Yeah, but sometimes it's worth considering, you know
.
Speaker 2 (02:28):
Oh, my goodness.
Okay, so you wanted to talkabout typology because it was
something we had brought up inone of our previous episodes the
whole storm and Jonah and thegarden full of weeds and stuff
like that.
Right and I'm very excited aboutthis and I don't know if we
(02:52):
maybe we'll have time at the endwe can kind of get into it or
maybe it'll be another episodethat we'll write down and forget
that we wrote down.
But on a similar kind of topic,betty was asking me the other
day about the symbolic nature ofnumbers in the Bible like three
and seven and six and twelveand yeah, all that, and so with
(03:15):
that, I guess very roughly, isthat a typology as well, no,
that wouldn't be typology.
Speaker 1 (03:22):
No, that'd be another kind of like uh, that'd be more
in terms of symbols, like whatis the number seven, right?
So what is number three, numberfour, uh, six, those things
that they're, that they.
And in jewish mysticism andjewish, there is a little
(03:42):
sidetrack there that withinJudaism there is this whole
thing that's kind of obsessedwith numbers, right, and so
whatever, I mean, I'm notstudied in that, so I don't want
to say anything other than that.
But yeah, this typology isdifferent.
(04:03):
The reason I wanted to bring itup was because the last time we
were talking say anything otherthan that.
But yeah, this typology isdifferent.
Yeah, the reason I wanted tobring it up was because the last
time we were talking, as youmentioned, you had brought up
that Bishop Barron had stirredup some of your considerations
and ponderings.
And going back to that, likeyou mentioned the idea of the
storm in the Book of Jonah, howBishop Barron presented the idea
(04:30):
or the suggestion that maybethe storm was a corrective to
Jonah's refusal to obey God'sword.
Right, and so the last time, aswe were going through that and
you were presenting yourreflections or your ideas on
that, I was thinking like hmm,maybe we should do a little bit
(04:54):
on the senses of scripture,because we had talked before a
little bit about typology, right, A little bit and we've touched
on that.
So I thought, maybe, followingup on that last episode, to do
something on the four senses ofscripture and open up the
Pandora's box on typology.
Speaker 2 (05:10):
Yeah Well, I'm glad that you want to, because it is
really easy.
We've talked about this before.
It is really easy with when youare your own magisterium.
It is really easy to kind of gooff into left field and people
are like how did you get there?
Speaker 1 (05:27):
You know what I mean.
Yeah, like David Koresh in Waco.
Speaker 2 (05:32):
Yeah, so there is the church in its wisdom knows how
and I guess, how to interpreteverything, and we need to be
careful that we are mindful ofthis and it's it's not bad per
se to explore these thoughts onyour own, but we want to make
(05:54):
sure that we are.
Speaker 1 (05:57):
Um, we go home every time right, we don't just keep
wandering off right, right.
And so what I want to do is Iwanted to touch a little bit on
that kind of stuff because thereis that danger, right, and then
there's, you know, later onwe'll probably do so write this
down and then forget that.
We write it down on LectioDivina when we start talking
(06:17):
about prayer, right?
Speaker 2 (06:18):
So this is a little bit different from that.
Speaker 1 (06:42):
But before I talk on the four senses of Scripture and
a little intro to typology, Iwant to recall the teaching of
the Second Vatican Council onthe Constitution on Divine
Revelation, which was entitledDe Verbum of God's Word, right
God's Word.
So in chapter 3 of that document, chapter 3 is entitled Sacred
Scripture, its Inspiration andDivine Interpretation.
Number 12 of chapter 3 states,however, since God speaks in
sacred Scripture through men, inhuman fashion, the interpreter
(07:09):
of Sacred Scripture, in order tosee clearly what God wants to
communicate to us, shouldcarefully investigate what
meaning the sacred writersreally intended and what God
wanted to manifest by means oftheir words.
(07:29):
And I think it's important forus to remember this, because
just the other day we were atlunch and Father Jim says you'll
never believe what they askedme during Bible studying, like
what Father he says so in theBible you know where are
dinosaurs and did dinosaurs?
(07:52):
And did Adam name dinosaurs orsomething Like okay, so yeah, we
talked a little bit about howwe're trying to explain that the
Bible is not a chronologicalhistory but sacred history and
the differences between that andso anyway, and then after we
(08:13):
had you and I had talked aboutthe Bishop Barron thing, like I
think we should probably saysomething about the four senses
of scripture.
So, anyway, getting back to thisconstitution, so it's a matter
of what did the person, what didthe sacred author intend to
(08:35):
communicate?
Right?
And since this is a divineinspiration and he or God, I
should say God is inspiring ahuman instrument, then the human
instrument only has humanrealities that he can use to try
(08:56):
to understand what it is thatGod is saying or trying to say.
Right, and only has thoselimited human realities by which
the author can communicate theinspiration.
So, humanity, today, in ourcentury, our knowledge and
understanding of the world isvery, very, very, very different
(09:18):
from the first century, and sothe human reality has changed,
understanding has changed, so wehave other ways of explaining
or using our understanding ofthe world in a different way.
Right?
So that's part of theunderstanding too, that there is
this idea of what is it thatthe script, the sacred author,
(09:42):
was trying to communicate to usand what were the tools he had
available.
Okay, yeah.
Speaker 2 (09:49):
Is this?
I guess a good example would belike when we covered the book
of Revelation.
He's speaking very it's like Idon't know what the word I'm
looking for.
It's culturally andhistorically relevant things
that are going on in his time atthat time.
(10:10):
But then there's also moreright.
Speaker 1 (10:13):
Because, it's.
Speaker 2 (10:14):
Inspired.
Or maybe the way people wouldtry to describe angels with like
a million eyeballs or somethinglike that they're using what
they understand to try todescribe something.
Speaker 1 (10:26):
Right, yeah, so this is part of it, right?
So in the Catechism Numbers 115through 119, the Catechism
touches on these senses ofScripture.
Senses of scripture.
(10:48):
So first, really quick, overall, in sacred scripture we see
that there's a literal sense anda spiritual sense, right, so
the spiritual sense itself thencan be subdivided into three
other senses.
So the four senses of scripturethen are literal what is
written down, and then thespiritual sense then would be
(11:11):
senses, would be allegorical,moral and anagogical.
Okay, we'll talk about that injust a minute.
So literal, what the sacredauthor wrote and what he
intended to convey to us in thatwriting, including the
(11:32):
metaphors that he used to conveyhis message, for example, I am
the good shepherd.
So the literal sense, then, isthe meaning conveyed by the
words of Scripture anddiscovered by exegesis.
Exegesis is the study of theword structure and the content,
(11:55):
the historical content.
Who was writing it?
What were they trying to convey?
That's part of the wholeexegesis of Scripture, right,
following the rules of soundinterpretation, all other senses
of sacred Scripture are basedon the literal.
So when Jesus says I am the goodshepherd, does that mean that
(12:16):
Jesus was an actual shepherd?
No, wait, a minute.
Wasn't he a carpenter.
So was he a carpenter and ashepherd?
No, he's using a metaphor,right, and so that's part of
literary expression, that's partof human expression, and so
trying to understand that thereis the use of metaphor.
(12:36):
So sometimes the literal isdifferent from, I guess, what we
would call strictly fundamentalthe letter of the written word.
Right, this actually means whatit says.
There is no sign or symbol ormetaphors being used, right?
Speaker 2 (12:56):
So… yeah, so I can see that being tricky for some
people who interpret things onlyliterally.
Think of certain Christiangroups.
Where it's the Bible, it isliteral, only Right.
Speaker 1 (13:10):
For example, there's two creation stories in Genesis,
so does that mean that there'stwo parallel universes?
Speaker 2 (13:16):
I mean is that what that?
Speaker 1 (13:17):
means.
Speaker 2 (13:20):
And this is also did I hear you right, or did I
understand you right, thateverything else has to be based
off of the literal meaning first, yeah, what is the author
attempting to say?
Speaker 1 (13:41):
What is the audience that the author is addressing?
Right, those are the literal,that's the literal basis, and
then from there we have thespiritual understanding, because
God's Word is life-giving andthere is a truth there.
There is an absolute truth inthe Scripture that we're
(14:02):
attempting to understand.
In the scripture that we'reattempting to understand, how is
that abiding truth applicableto our life today as a believing
community?
So that's part of that wholeliteral sense.
First, I have to understandwho's talking to what, and okay,
so then how does that apply?
(14:23):
What is the truth there that'sstill applicable to us in the
present day that we findourselves in?
Speaker 2 (14:31):
Yeah, would this be the same way, not just with
Scripture, but the same way youshould learn from Jesus'
parables?
Speaker 1 (14:38):
Yes.
Speaker 2 (14:38):
Okay.
Speaker 1 (14:39):
So a parable, again, is a literary device, right?
So what is Jesus trying toteach us through this literary
device?
There's something here thathe's trying to get across to us,
for example, the whole idea ofthe seed that is cast on stony
ground, the thorns, the goodsoil, the shallow soil right.
(15:02):
Ground the thorns, the goodsoil, the shallow soil right.
Is it really a lesson ongardening?
Or what is it that he's tryingto get across to us, right?
And so there's this whole idea,then, that there is this device
, this literary device that theLord is trying to explain to us.
One, I think, for example, inthat parable, is God's
(15:24):
generosity.
Generosity meaning he'sgenerous, he doesn't measure
Himself out, right?
If you would think about that,to sow the seed, you would go
and prepare, because you'dprepare the soil, because you
want to make sure that everyseed has the real, the great
opportunity, or a greateropportunity to germinate.
(15:44):
And here in the parables, like.
God is so generous, he's justcontinuously scattering his
mercy, his love, his inspiration.
So again, that's part of thatliterary device of the parable.
Speaker 2 (16:00):
All right, so that makes sense.
What's the allegorical then?
Speaker 1 (16:03):
So the allegorical in the Catechism number 117,.
The Catechism tells us we canacquire a more profound
understanding of events byrecognizing their significance
in Christ.
Thus the crossing of the RedSea, when Israel comes out of
(16:27):
Egypt, right, the crossing ofthe Red Sea is a sign or type of
Christ's victory and also ofChristian baptism.
Okay, so we have to be carefulhere.
The allegory is not arbitrary,so that each reader can attempt
(16:48):
to apply whatever value orinterpretation that they want to
the Scripture verse, right, butthat the allegory is something
that is inspired or illuminatedby faith and discovers Christ in
all of Scripture.
That is so in allegory.
I'm always looking forsomething that connects to
(17:11):
Christ, something that points toChrist.
I'm always looking for that.
That is the allegory.
So, for example, crossing theRed Sea, it's like well, okay,
the Red Sea, red River.
So if we cross the Red River wego into Oklahoma or from
Oklahoma to Texas.
No, that's not it, because ithas to point back to the literal
(17:34):
interpretation it points backto the literal interpretation,
and the allegorical is alwayslooking for some connection to
Christ, right?
So then crossing the Red Sea,right?
So it'd be like, okay, that'dbe like.
(17:55):
The allegory would be that thatis like baptism, in that, just
as Israel came out of Egypt fromslavery, for us baptism is
coming away from the slavery tosin, from that death of slavery
to the life of the new people,right, the people that God is
redeeming.
So we would see, then, thecrossing of the Red Sea as a
(18:15):
type—I'm going to go a littlebit—I'm going to jump ahead a
little bit a type of baptism,right?
So, okay, we'll touch back onthat in a minute.
So that's the allegorical, sothe moral sense.
(18:36):
The catechism tells us again innumber 117, the events reported
in Scripture ought to lead us toact justly.
So that's the moral sense.
How does this help me to live amoral life?
How does this help me in mymorality?
As St Paul says, they arewritten for our instruction.
(18:59):
So if we have found theallegorical sense of the
scripture, the consequenceshould be that I commit to
living what I have discovered.
That is what is the moralconsequence of the allegorical
sense.
It is the life that flows forthfrom the life itself.
So, in the allegory of crossingthe Red Sea and it is the
(19:24):
allegory of baptism going fromdeath, enslavement to sin, to
new life in Christ, then themoral sense would be what is the
moral implication then ofliving the new life?
How do I free myself from theslavery of sin now that I am
(19:47):
enjoying the freedom of the sonsof God, or I've been adopted in
Jesus Christ through baptism?
Right?
Speaker 2 (19:54):
Yeah, and the moral life is not a subjective set of
morals, depending on our cultureand circumstance or whatever it
is the objective truth offollowing Jesus.
Speaker 1 (20:06):
Right, so.
And the moral virtues?
Right, and you can look that upin the catechism as well.
So then, the fourth sense ofthe scripture.
So you have the literal.
Then you have the allegorical,which is looking for some
connection to Christ or Christ'slife, the Christ event.
(20:27):
And then you have the moral,which is, somehow, how does that
Christ event, how does thattruth of Christ reflect in my
moral life, how do I grow invirtue, how do I live a good
life?
And then you have what is knownas the anagogical sense, and in
number 117, again, of theCatechism.
(20:49):
The Catechism tells us we canview realities and events in
terms of their eternalsignificance, leading us toward
our true home.
Thus, the church on earth is asign of the heavenly Jerusalem.
In other words, another way oflooking at the anagogical is how
does this point me towards theeschaton, towards the end times,
(21:13):
right to that final fulfillment, right, so then?
Okay, so, living a moral lifebecause of my baptism.
But now that means that livinga moral life or living a
virtuous life, that this ispointing me beyond the temporal
reality, to that heavenlyJerusalem, to glory, to heaven
(21:33):
whichever word you want to useto the beatific vision that it
helps me to see that there is alife beyond the temporal reality
that I perceive right, thatthere is eternal life that I am
striving for, right.
So that's the anagogical.
(21:55):
How does this help me thenachieve or move or work towards
that eschatological reality?
Right, excuse me, in the number118 of the Catechism this is the
way that the Catechism kind ofsummarizes this the letter, or
(22:19):
the literal sense.
The letter speaks of deeds.
Allegory speaks of or speaks tofaith.
The moral speaks to action.
How do I act?
The anagogy speaks to ourdestiny as God's children.
Speaker 2 (22:44):
That's really interesting.
That's something worth chewingon.
Can you just repeat that?
I think you could take theEucharist and look at it like
this right, you could take lotsof things, but you got to follow
this kind of formula, right,right.
Speaker 1 (23:05):
And so, like the catechism says and this is kind
of like the way the catechismsummarizes these four senses,
right.
So the catechism says theletter speaks of deeds, allegory
to faith, the moral, how to act, anagaji, our destiny.
(23:25):
In other words, okay.
So what is the literal, theletter, what is the literal
thing that we are reading?
What is it that the sacredauthor is communicating to us?
So how does this help me in myfaith?
What is the faith lesson that Ican take from this sacred
scripture?
(23:45):
Then, how do I act?
After I understand what I'mreading, after I understand the
faith aspect of it?
How do I act?
That's the moral sense, right?
And then how does this help meachieve my destiny, which is to
come to eternal life with JesusChrist, in communion with Father
(24:07):
, son and Spirit?
Speaker 2 (24:09):
Can you take this now and break down, jonah Okay.
Speaker 1 (24:14):
So Jonah it depends what part of Jonah we're talking
about, but since Bishop Barronhad brought this up, okay, so
the overall teaching need toappease the gods.
And then Jonah says, oh, it'smy fault because I'm running
(24:49):
from God and he's like what?
And so then they said that's it.
And they say we're sorry, butwe have to throw you overboard.
And he goes I understand, goahead, throw me overboard.
They throw him overboard andthe sea's calm, the ship is
saved, the sea's calm, the shipis saved, the people don't die.
And then Jonah's swallowed by awhale.
Okay, so let's look at that.
So that is the deed.
(25:10):
So the deed is what that, asBishop Barron had brought up,
that the possibility of thisbeing corrective, that, as Jonah
is running from God, refusingto do or refusing to accept his
vocation, right, his call, thatis the letter.
(25:32):
So, and then the allegory, orhow does this, how does this
point to Christ?
Because again, it has to bepoint to Christ and to faith
Point to Christ?
Because again, it has to bepoint to Christ and to faith.
So we say then, if the storm isthe corrective, then can we say
(25:57):
that Christ's incarnation isthe corrective.
And so then is Jonah a type ofhere we're going to typology.
Is Jonah a type of the fallenAdam or the disobedient Adam?
And so, to correct thedisobedient Adam, god sends his
word into the world.
Which is this corrective storm,right, that's the faith.
(26:20):
Storm, right, that's the faith.
And then the morality is thenwell, does that mean that I
should do my best to not resistGod's Word, not resist what God
is asking of me?
That is the morality, right.
And so, then, that would leadme to my destiny as a faithful
(26:43):
covenant person, or person beingfaithful to the covenant that
we have in Israel or thecovenant that we have in Jesus
Christ, right?
So there's different ways ofbeing able to apply that, then,
to that particular aspect of thestory of Jonah.
Okay, I see wheels turning.
What's going on?
Speaker 2 (27:01):
No, no, it's good, it's good.
This is a really good formula.
I'm surprised surprised thatthe church has some good stuff
in helping you to understandwhat's going on in all these
stories, Because some of thesestories are especially the Old
Testament ones are wild, right,Like the book of Job.
(27:24):
It's like bananas.
But if you take this formulaand you go back and read it, you
probably end up going oh, Algoasi, yes, so going back to the
allegorical sense of scriptureand the storm in the book of
(27:48):
Jonah.
Speaker 1 (27:50):
Okay, so, just as I just did that, right now there
is also what is known astypology.
This is where we open Pandora'sbox, in both biblical
interpretations and therefore intheology as well.
We can say that typology, thisidea of typology, goes back to
(28:12):
the apostles' encounter with therisen Lord.
We are told that Jesus openedtheir minds to the Scriptures.
It's not like they didn't knowthe Scriptures.
They knew the Scriptures, butobviously there's something in
the Scriptures that they didn'tunderstand.
There's some meaning in theScriptures that he needed to
(28:35):
open their minds to, tounderstand who he was as Messiah
.
Right, he was able to point outto them those parts of the
Scripture that apply to him asMessiah and the connection to
the Paschal Mystery.
Then we can say that typologyis the doctrine or the theory
(28:58):
that connects the Old and theNew Testaments.
So we as Catholic Christians, weas a church, we profess that
the Old Testament was apreparation for the New
Testament, was a preparation forthe New Testament, and that the
Old Testament is fulfilled inthe New Testament and that they
are inseparable.
(29:19):
Right, so we need both.
So in typology.
So we've already talked aboutthe senses, the four senses of
Scripture.
So now in typology, which isthen that other layer that you
can add to the four senses.
So in typology, situations,events, persons found in the Old
(29:46):
Testament are understood to betypes that prefigure and are
superseded by antitypes that arethe events or aspects of Christ
or Christ's revelation asdescribed in the New Testament.
So the antitype would be thefulfillment of the type right.
(30:06):
So Jonah.
Going back to Jonah, the personof Jonah could be seen as a
type of Christ.
When Jonah emerges from thebelly of the whale, he would
appear to rise from the dead, ordeath right from the whale's
belly as is definitively seen inChrist's resurrection after
(30:31):
being in the belly of the earthor the belly of death.
So that is how Jonah, then,could be a type of Christ, and
Christ would be the anti-typeright, the fulfillment of the
type right, yeah, that makes alot of sense, because it was
three days and three days too,wasn't it?
Speaker 2 (30:49):
Yeah, yeah.
Speaker 1 (30:51):
And so other common typological allegories entail
the four major Old Testamentprophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah,
Ezekiel and Daniel, and thetypology is that they prefigure,
or they're types of, theanti-types, which are the four
evangelists, Matthew, Mark, Lukeand John, or type again, the 12
(31:23):
tribes of Israel were the typeof the foreshadowing of the 12
apostles and they're thereforethe new Israel.
So commentators could findcountless analogies between
stories of the Old Testament andthe New Testament.
Modern typologists prefer tolimit themselves to considering
typological relationships thatthey find between the New
Testament itself, not outside ofthe scriptures.
(31:44):
Right, the sacred scriptures,for example Jonah.
Right, Because sometimes peopleget caught up in typologies and
so all of a sudden, like I saidearlier, you become David
Koresh in Waco and you've gotall sorts of stuff going on that
has nothing to do with Jesus,right, yeah, or the scriptures.
(32:04):
So then this way of approachingthe scripture was seen in the
early church.
The early church, Paul himself,in his letter to the Romans,
calls Adam a type of the one whowas to come, and that's in
Romans 5.14.
The early church fathers see inthe passion of Christ the
(32:29):
antitype, or the fulfillment ofseveral Old Testament events or
persons.
Adam is a type of Christ Eve isa type of the church.
The tree of knowledge points tothe tree of life, which is the
cross.
Eve was taken from Adam's sideduring his sleep.
(32:50):
The church is born from thesight of Christ, while he sleeps
in death.
Speaker 2 (32:56):
So all those are different Because, yeah, because
everything's got to point backto Jesus.
Correct In the allegory part.
Correct.
Speaker 1 (33:04):
Correct, correct, correct, correct, okay, for
example, another one is in theGospel of John, mary Magdalene
encounters Jesus in the garden.
So it goes back to it's thefirst day of the week.
It goes back to the garden, soit goes back to day one of
Genesis.
(33:24):
This is now the new creation,and Jesus is in the garden and
Jesus is the gardener.
And so now, we have.
All that is part of thattypology, right?
Speaker 2 (33:34):
so that's how that, that's yeah, that's really well,
it's really creative, it'sreally imaginative.
Right, it's gripping, becauseanytime you connect dots
somewhere, your little lightbulb turns on over your head,
right, you're like oh, oh yeah,exactly.
Speaker 1 (33:52):
So that's part of the whole typology thing, right?
So, going back then to thiswhole idea of typology, one can
say and understand that thefirst community of believers was
struggling with what to make ofthe scriptures as they knew
them, because now they had beenfulfilled in the coming of the
(34:15):
Messiah.
Like, okay, now, since we'vebeen waiting, these hundreds and
hundreds and hundreds andhundreds of years we've been
anticipating, we've been prayingthat the Messiah come, that the
Messiah come, the Messiah come,and all of a sudden the Messiah
is here and you're like okay,so now, what do we do?
Now?
What is the purpose ofScripture?
Now, what is the value ofScripture?
(34:36):
Right?
So then you know, as thecommunity is struggling with the
role and the purpose ofScripture, this is how we have
Jesus opening the mind of theapostles to the Scripture and
that they are necessary for usto understand exactly who Jesus
is as Messiah, that he is thefulfillment of all these
promises.
Right, the early church sawthat the scripture was that
(35:00):
prophesied the coming of theChrist and his paschal mystery.
Now they understand.
Speaker 2 (35:05):
Oh, so, okay, now I see there's different areas in
this scripture that touch uponthat right, that understanding
and they from the from in thebible and extra biblical sources
from the early christians, youcan tell how highly regarded um
(35:29):
scripture was still right and,like paul says it's, it's uh, of
course I'll butcher it um, it'sgood for teaching and, yes,
reproof and all that kind ofstuff right like this.
So, but only because there'snow, as they go through and read
this sacred scripture, thisinspired word, they're seeing
(35:50):
how it is all being fulfilled inJesus.
So I guess that man, I bet theallegory of it all was probably
so exciting to them as they gottogether and they would kind of
open up the word and everyone'slittle minds would just right
and we take it for granted,probably.
Speaker 1 (36:11):
Oh yeah, that's unfortunate, but, yes, that's
very true.
So we could say, then, thattypology can also be seen as a
theory of history of theJudeo-Christian community is
(36:39):
shaped by God, with symbolicevents occurring that act as
types of later events like, as Isaid before, is the journey.
We could say that the journeyof Israel through the desert,
then, can be very much a type ofthe journey of the church, the
believing church today, as wewander through the desert of the
world that does not believe,right?
So just as Israel struggled inthe desert, so we're struggling
(37:01):
in the desert, right?
So just as Israel was tempted,we're tempted.
Just as Israel rebelled,sometimes we tend to rebel.
So those are sort of thatparadigm that has been set
before us of that typology ofsalvation history.
So this whole approach toscriptures and understanding
(37:22):
salvation history, it developedall through the early church and
well into the 1300s.
There came about even a systemduring the medieval times and
the system that was attemptingto understand what seemed to be
(37:43):
discontinuities between the Oldand the New Testament.
So what about the holocausts?
What about the high priest andwhat about this and what about
that?
All those different things, therituals and the sin offerings
and the ark and all those things, right?
So how does this make sense,right?
So there's a whole system thatwas trying to bring these things
(38:08):
to conciliation with each other, to conciliation with each
other.
So the church revered andreveres both the Old Testament
and the New as inspired.
And in the Middle Ages, thetheologians began to discern
allegories in the Old Testamentthat foreshadowed the events of
(38:28):
the New Testament, for examplethe sacrifice of Isaac as a type
of the crucifixion of Jesus.
So you have these typologies,right, these signs, and Jesus
being the antitype or thefulfillment of that type.
And Paul himself speaks of theexistence of allegory and types,
(38:51):
right?
Which then goes back to thiswhole idea.
That goes contrary to thiswhole fundamentalist, literalist
interpretation of Scripture,because Paul himself, in his
letter to the Colossians, saysin chapter two of the Colossians
, verses 16 and 17,.
Paul says, therefore, do notlet anyone judge you by what you
(39:12):
eat or drink, referring to thepurity laws, right, the food
purity laws or with regard to areligious festival.
So why aren't you keeping theJewish festivals right A new
moon celebration or a Sabbathday?
These are a shadow of thethings that were to come.
(39:34):
The reality, however, is foundin Christ.
Speaker 2 (39:41):
So something that pops in my head is how exciting
intellectually all these littlekind of connections are are.
But I can see like a bit of atrap here is, or a danger is, if
you get caught up in step two,the allegory, and you start
(40:06):
there, you start just looking atthe allegories, then you're
passing up all of the literalmeaning of the Old Testament
scripture and the New Testamentscripture, the Old Testament
scripture and the New Testamentscripture, Right, right and then
again so, for example, one ofthe things that I always get
into a discussion withliteralists, where the scripture
says if your right hand is thecause of sin, cut it off.
Speaker 1 (40:32):
If it's your left hand, pluck it out right.
Left eye, pluck it out right.
So that's the literal.
And then again, another literalis John says if you say you
have no sin, then you're a liar.
It's like, okay, so if you're afundamentalist and you're a
literalist, you are a sinner.
But then so why?
You know, you have both yourhands, you have both your eyes.
(40:54):
So what?
Explain to me, right?
Speaker 2 (41:01):
Yeah, yeah, you're either.
Well, yeah, because you'restuck you're lying.
Speaker 1 (41:06):
Yes, exactly.
Speaker 2 (41:07):
Exactly Because you can't be without sin.
So you're lying.
Exactly so you're a liar.
Speaker 1 (41:11):
So okay, so then, what?
So again, and so this is partof the problem that can happen
is that we can misinterpretsomething that the Lord is
bringing to us.
Something might strike me,something might inspire me, and
so then it's a matter of okay.
So what is this?
Is this the Spirit wants me toponder this?
(41:32):
Is this something here for meas an individual in my own
journey?
Do I see how this is connectedto Christ and the Christ event,
and do I see how this is askingof me?
Then you know what is the moralchallenge, the challenge to
virtue, the challenge to morallife, and then how does this
help me to move towards my endgoal, which is life in communion
(41:59):
with the Trinity in the nextlife?
Right, so all this is againsomething that has to be
balanced, right, it's aboutbalance in understanding the
literal, the allegorical, themoral, the anagogical.
Right, this is part of theprocess, and in the typology,
you have to be careful aboutgetting—it's about looking for
(42:22):
types that don't exist.
Right, or looking for typesunder every rock.
Right, like you have to becareful.
Right, use discretion.
And so then this leads to one ofthe problems that came with
this as it entered deeper intothe church.
And then what happened was,after the Protestant revolution,
(42:44):
all of a sudden everybody wasseeing all types of typologies
everywhere and interpretingthings and da-da-da-da, and so,
you know, it all became crazy.
So, again, this was a veryprominent teaching or
catechizing tool typologies upuntil the 13th and other
(43:04):
Protestant leaders, especiallythe Puritans, in a very radical
way dove headfirst into thesetypological interpretations.
And so what happened was, inthe church, the Catholic church,
(43:26):
like okay, let's just step backfrom this a little bit and let
them this has been co-opted bythe Protestants, right.
And so the church says let'sjust step back a little bit from
this, right.
And so we still have a lot ofthe teachings from the old
church fathers, the early churchfathers, in terms of typologies
(43:46):
, and even nowadays we'reregaining this sense of typology
and re-entering into this ideaof the paradigm that has been
set for us in Jesus Christ andHis paschal mystery.
Speaker 2 (44:00):
Mm-hmm, that's an interesting.
That last little bit isinteresting to me because I know
that there are a lot ofProtestant denominations, if you
want to call them that, or youknow what's the phrase you use
instead of church.
Speaker 1 (44:22):
Communities, faith, traditions.
Speaker 2 (44:23):
Communities.
There you go, Communities.
Yeah, so there's differentnon-Catholic faith communities,
right, who don't even read fromthe Old Testament.
Speaker 1 (44:31):
No.
Speaker 2 (44:32):
Like everything's just New Testament, Right.
But then and I've back in theday, I tried to attend a bunch
of different churches, right,because I was searching, and
something that I kind of noticedis that it seemed very
interesting how the preachingcan a lot of times feel like it
was very tailored for me somehow, lot of times feel like it was
(44:55):
very tailored for me somehow.
And then I'm like, wow, how isit that it always seems to have
some kind of application to me?
Now, part of that is becausesacred scripture is good stuff,
right, but it's also becauseit's all allegory, but it's
starting with the New Testamentand it's trying to connect to my
life instead of connecting toJesus.
Speaker 1 (45:22):
So, instead of the literal connecting to Jesus,
connecting to moral, so it wasgoing from literal to moral and
skipping the allegory.
Speaker 2 (45:33):
Yeah, or it was just allegory between what could be
going on in my life, so it'svery generalized, that kind of
like you're casting a reallybroad net here so that anybody
who's listening can find someway to allegorically connect to
it.
Speaker 1 (45:48):
Right.
Speaker 2 (45:49):
But you're missing the literal part Right.
You're missing the literal partRight, and so I wonder is it
helpful or is it not worth it Idon't want to say dangerous, but
not worth it when you'retalking with one of our
non-Catholic Christian brothersand sisters, is it helpful to
try to use typology when you'retrying to find common ground
(46:12):
with them you know what I meanor is it something that you
should try to use sparingly?
Speaker 1 (46:18):
Well, I think, first, it would depend upon what faith
community or what faithtradition they come from, right,
what is their basis?
Right, what is their basic,fundamental understanding of
salvation history?
And secondly, which issomething that I've always
stated and will state until Istand before the throne, is the
(46:39):
radical difference between usand Protestants is Protestants
hold to personal interpretation,and so then that means that,
even though I speak to aProtestant about what the church
teaches, according to theirunderstanding of scripture, it's
(46:59):
like, no, okay, that's a goodidea, but it's what I make it to
be, it's my understanding.
That is essential, right, andthere's where the problem comes,
right.
So, yeah, there's that huge,it's a huge chasm between us and
them, because there is adifference between the
(47:20):
interpretation of Scripture ashas been handed on to us by
apostolic tradition and oraltradition.
Right Versus no.
This is what I interpret it tobe.
One of the big abusers of thatthat I just mentioned earlier
was Koresh, david Koresh, hisinterpretation of the Psalms,
his interpretation of this heclaimed himself to be the
(47:43):
Messiah, he claimed himself tobe the new Christ, he used
scripture and because, again,there is no guardrails I mean,
it's what I say, it is.
Speaker 2 (48:05):
Yeah, so maybe it's a good way to try to understand
what someone else is.
Speaker 1 (48:13):
I mean, I think it's great if you could just explain
this is the way we see it, thisis the way we understand it.
There are these four senses ofscripture and there's also this
typology, and this is the way weinterpret it and, however you
do, it is the way you do it, butthis is the way that we have
since the very beginning.
And you can even quote Paul,right?
(48:35):
It's in Scripture.
So even Paul himself talksabout types, right?
So I think that's a good placeto start and it might start some
thinking in the other personand their approach to Scripture.
Speaker 2 (48:54):
Yeah, man, this has been helpful and I want to.
It makes you.
It makes me want to go andreread a lot of the parables or
pay attention in at massslightly differently, right,
just again using this formula,trying to understand.
(49:14):
You know what's been going on,and maybe even not in a judging
way, but see how the homily isconstructed right Because.
I think it's probably a helpfulway for the priests and deacons
to reach.
Speaker 1 (49:33):
Yeah, so are they focusing on all four senses, or
the other scripture, or just onesense of the scripture?
And so I mean, yeah, it's their, their, their approach to to
how to present that.
Speaker 2 (49:45):
Yeah, super cool.
Speaker 1 (49:47):
Well, thanks for this .
You're welcome.
You're the one that's going tospark this.
I go like I better do somethingabout that.
Speaker 2 (49:54):
Yeah, well, I'm going to go run amok then and see
what else I can inspire you toteach on.
All right, everyone thanks forjoining us.
Father thanks for playing.
Thank you, god bless, I loveyou.
Love you and everyone.
We'll see you later.
Hasta later, Bye.
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
Ridiculous History
History is beautiful, brutal and, often, ridiculous. Join Ben Bowlin and Noel Brown as they dive into some of the weirdest stories from across the span of human civilization in Ridiculous History, a podcast by iHeartRadio.