Pope Pius XII and the Historical-Critical Method

By James Fergusson

This work explores the evolution of Catholic biblical scholarship from the papacy of Pius XII through the post-Vatican II period, focusing on the Church's engagement with modern historical-critical methods in the study of scripture. Beginning with Pius XII's cautious endorsement of these methods in Divino Afflante Spiritu (1943), the study traces how his papacy laid the groundwork for a more open and dynamic approach to the Bible, fostering a dialogue between traditional doctrinal teachings and contemporary scholarly methods. Vatican II's Dei Verbum (1965) expanded on this foundation, emphasizing the complementary roles of scripture, tradition, and the Magisterium in interpreting divine revelation. The work examines key theological concepts such as the inerrancy of scripture, the dual authorship of the Bible, and the relationship between historical criticism and theological reflection, offering a nuanced view of how the Church navigated the complex terrain of modern biblical scholarship. Additionally, the study highlights the continuing influence of Pius XII's intellectual legacy on subsequent theological debates and the ongoing challenges and opportunities for Catholic biblical scholarship in the contemporary world. Through an analysis of primary sources, scholarly debates, and ecclesiastical documents, the work contributes to understanding how Catholic scholars have engaged with modern biblical criticism while maintaining fidelity to the faith, shaping the future of Catholic biblical studies.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Historia Magna
• Release date: Jan 11, 2025
• ISBN: 9798230525622

Book preview

Chapter 2: The Rise of the Historical-Critical Method

The historical-critical method represents one of the most transformative developments in the study of sacred scripture, a paradigm shift that began in the Enlightenment and matured throughout the 19th and early 20th centuries. Its emergence was tied to a broader intellectual movement that sought to apply reason, historical inquiry, and empirical observation to all fields of knowledge, including theology. This approach rejected purely allegorical or spiritual interpretations of the Bible in favor of understanding its human authors, historical contexts, and literary forms. However, for the Catholic Church, which had long upheld the divine authorship and inerrancy of scripture, this new method raised significant theological and pastoral concerns.

The origins of the historical-critical method can be traced to the Protestant Reformation and its insistence on sola scriptura—the belief that scripture alone is the supreme authority in matters of faith and doctrine. This emphasis on scripture encouraged early Protestant scholars to engage deeply with the biblical text in its original languages. However, it was the Enlightenment, with its emphasis on historical skepticism and rational inquiry, that laid the groundwork for a more systematic and scientific approach to biblical studies. Figures such as Baruch Spinoza in the 17th century questioned the traditional Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch, arguing that the first five books of the Bible bore the marks of multiple authors and editorial layers. Spinoza's critique was rooted in his philosophical rationalism, but it opened the door to a more detailed literary analysis of the biblical text.

By the 19th century, German scholars became the principal architects of the historical-critical method. Julius Wellhausen’s Prolegomena to the History of Israel (1878) was a seminal work that articulated the Documentary Hypothesis, which argued that the Pentateuch was composed of four distinct sources—J (Yahwist), E (Elohist), D (Deuteronomist), and P (Priestly)—each reflecting different theological perspectives and historical contexts. Wellhausen’s historical reconstruction of Israel’s religious development was deeply influential but also controversial. His work suggested that much of the Old Testament was not a direct divine revelation but a product of human religious evolution, challenging traditional views of scriptural inspiration and authorship.

Contemporaries such as Hermann Gunkel further advanced the historical-critical method by focusing on form criticism. Gunkel argued that biblical texts, particularly in the Old Testament, were shaped by oral traditions and could be classified according to their literary genres or forms (e.g., hymns, laments, proverbs). His work emphasized the importance of understanding the social and religious contexts in which these forms arose, shedding light on the lived experience of ancient Israelite communities. Similarly, in New Testament studies, scholars like Adolf von Harnack applied historical-critical methods to reconstruct the historical Jesus, seeking to distinguish the Jesus of history from the Christ of faith as portrayed by the early Church. Harnack’s emphasis on Jesus as a moral teacher rather than a divine redeemer reflected the rationalist tendencies of liberal Protestantism, which sought to demythologize scripture and strip away what it perceived as supernatural embellishments.

Catholic responses to the historical-critical method in the 19th century were shaped by a complex interplay of openness and defensiveness. The encyclical Providentissimus Deus (1893) by Pope Leo XIII was a landmark document that sought to navigate this intellectual terrain. Leo XIII recognized the need for Catholic scholars to engage with modern methods to defend the faith against rationalist critiques, but he also issued strong warnings against any interpretation that undermined the Church’s teachings on the divine inspiration and inerrancy of scripture. The encyclical reaffirmed the belief that the Bible, being divinely inspired, was free from error in all matters it intended to teach, whether related to faith, morals, or historical events. However, the nuances of Leo XIII’s message were often overshadowed by the broader anti-modernist measures taken in the early 20th century, particularly under Pius X.

The Pontifical Biblical Commission, established in 1902, became a central institution for guiding Catholic biblical studies during this period. Initially, its primary function was to monitor and, when necessary, censure Catholic scholars who were perceived to be straying too close to modernist interpretations. The case of the French Dominican priest Marie-Joseph Lagrange is illustrative of this tension. Lagrange, the founder of the École Biblique in Jerusalem, was a pioneering Catholic biblical scholar who sought to incorporate historical-critical methods into Catholic exegesis while remaining faithful to the Church’s teachings. His commentary on the Pentateuch and other works demonstrated a careful engagement with source criticism, yet he was viewed with suspicion by more conservative factions within the Vatican. Lagrange’s work was a precursor to the more balanced approach that would later be endorsed by Pius XII in Divino Afflante Spiritu.

The broader intellectual climate of the early 20th century was shaped by significant archaeological discoveries in the Near East, including the unearthing of ancient Mesopotamian texts such as the Epic of Gilgamesh and the Code of Hammurabi. These findings provided valuable historical context for the Old Testament and revealed striking parallels between biblical narratives and other ancient Near Eastern traditions. For example, the story of Noah’s flood in Genesis bore notable similarities to the flood narrative in the Epic of Gilgamesh, raising questions about the originality and historical accuracy of the biblical account. Catholic scholars were faced with the challenge of integrating these discoveries into their understanding of scripture without compromising the uniqueness of divine revelation.

By the time Eugenio Pacelli became Pope Pius XII, the historical-critical method had become a dominant approach in academic biblical studies, yet it remained a source of controversy within the Church. Pius XII’s diplomatic experience in Germany had given him a firsthand understanding of both the intellectual rigor and the potential theological pitfalls of modern biblical scholarship. He recognized that the Church could not ignore the historical-critical method without risking intellectual isolation, but he was also determined to ensure that Catholic exegesis remained grounded in the Church’s doctrinal foundations.

In this context, the rise of the historical-critical method was not merely an academic development but part of a broader cultural and theological struggle over the authority of scripture and the relationship between faith and reason. The method's proponents argued that by studying the Bible as a historical document, scholars could arrive at a deeper understanding of its meaning and relevance. Critics, however, feared that reducing scripture to a product of human history would erode its status as the Word of God. Pius XII’s challenge was to articulate a vision of biblical scholarship that could embrace the legitimate insights of historical criticism while safeguarding the theological integrity of scripture.

The stage was thus set for the momentous contribution of Divino Afflante Spiritu, in which Pius XII sought to mediate between tradition and modernity. His endorsement of historical-critical tools reflected a recognition that truth could be pursued through rigorous historical inquiry, but always within the framework of faith. This chapter of Catholic intellectual history highlights not only the evolution of biblical studies but also the enduring tension between continuity and change in the Church’s engagement with the modern world. In this dynamic interplay of ideas, Pius XII would emerge as a pivotal figure whose legacy continues to shape the study of scripture today.

Chapter 3: The Biblical Commission and Catholic Thought

The establishment of the Pontifical Biblical Commission in 1902 by Pope Leo XIII marked a significant institutional response to the burgeoning influence of the historical-critical method in biblical studies. This body was charged with the dual mandate of promoting sound biblical scholarship and safeguarding the doctrinal integrity of the Catholic faith. However, its early history was defined more by its role as a watchdog against perceived theological deviations than as a forum for encouraging innovative academic research. The creation of the Commission can be seen as a defensive move during a period of intellectual upheaval, reflecting the Church’s concern over the potential destabilizing effects of modern historical-critical approaches. By the time of Pius XII’s papacy, the Commission had become a central mechanism for the Church’s regulation of biblical interpretation, though it would also be a means through which the pope would signal a gradual shift toward a more open engagement with contemporary scholarship.

The early 20th century was marked by a series of controversies surrounding Catholic exegetes who sought to incorporate the tools of modern historical inquiry into their studies of scripture. Prominent