www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Scripture and Patristic Writings Father Raymond Brown

Any thoughts on the orthodoxy of scripture scholar Father Raymond Brown? Has anyone here read any of his books? Blessings! Silouan, Mary's monk

Monk Silouan,

I once studied under his nemesis, Father William Most, who had very little regard for the orthodoxy of his work. He is one I would say needs to be read with a discerning eye, although I have certainly used his stuff. Some of his work on John's Gospel (especially his early material) is absolutely groundbreaking.

I wonder whether the pressure to produce "new" and innovative research in academic theology produces individuals who are more apt to push the envelope when it comes exegesis which is faithful to Tradition.

Hope that helps...

Gordo

Dear Monk Silouan,

Christ is Risen!

(Are you a priest?)

I found a scathing article about him on a traditional (not traditionalist, he says the Novus Ordo is valid) website:

http://www.catholicintl.com/epologetics/articles/pastoral/fr-ray-brown1.htm

"Fr. Brown drew sharp criticism from the late Lawrence Cardinal Shehan and others for his pioneering role "in a new Catholic theology founded on modern exegesis" that cast doubt on the historical accuracy of numerous articles of the Catholic faith.
These articles of faith, proclaimed by Popes and believed by the faithful over the centuries, include Jesus' physical Resurrection; the Transfiguration; the fact that Jesus founded the one, true Catholic Church and instituted the priesthood and the episcopacy; the fact that 12 Apostles were missionaries and bishops; and the truth that Jesus was not "ignorant" on a number of matters.

Not least, though, was Fr. Brown's exegesis concerning the infancy narratives of Saints Matthew and Luke that calls into question the virginal conception of Jesus and the accounts of our Lord's birth and childhood.

In addition to Cardinal Shehan, such eminent peers of Fr. Brown as Msgr. George A. Kelly, Fr. William Most, Fr. Richard Gilsdorf, Fr. Rene Laurentin, and John J. Mulloy were highly critical of the Brown revisionism of the Catholic Church's age-old theology of inspiration and inerrancy."

http://www.catholicculture.org/docs/doc_view.cfm?recnum=525


Here's the wikipedia article on him:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raymond_E._Brown

I've heard bad things about him, but haven't read any of his works.

Oh no...not a biblical exegesis issue.

I am a big fan of the PBC and biblical exegesis. So, to me, there are probably a lot of things that may come up that really are not as controverisal as they may seem. I am really in the minority I will suppose because I like the NAB.

Probably one of the best books to get on Father Raymond Brown (from a critical vantage point) is Msgr George Kelly's The New Bibilical Theorists: Raymond E. Brown and beyond published by Servant. I read it about 15 years ago and it was a very helpful critique of Brown's work.

My favorite work by him is his commentary on the Gospel of St. John and the Johannine Epistles published by Liturgical Press in 1952 as part of their "New Testament Reading Guide" series (Vol 13). It is a hard one to locate these days, but his walk through the Gospel and the parallels he makes with the Book of Genesis are second to none, in my opinion.

Here is the Amazon link:

The New Biblical Theorists [amazon.com]

His notoriety came with his work on the Infancy Narratives, casting doubt on the Virgin Birth. It is a shame to see that such a promising orthodox exegete ended up being a source of scandal. To be sure, history is full of such people, but I view Father Raymond Brown as a tragic figure, despite the popularity of his works.

My two cents...

Gordo

PS: Laka Ta Rabb, I assume by PBC you mean "Pontifical Biblical Commission". I googled a few other options:

Primary Biliary Cirrhosis
Peninsula Bible Church
Piedmont Baptist College
Portobello Business Centre
Pakistan Broadcasting Corporation
People's Bank of China
Polar Bear Club
Parrot Bytecode (PBC) Format
Palestinian Broadcating Corporation
Paint Ball Central
Peach Belt Conference
Padmasambhava Buddhist Center
Partei Bibeltreuer Christen
Phi Beta Chi Lutheran Fraternity
Pottery Barn Coupons
Palm Beach County
Portsmouth Boat Club

I'm not sure if you are a fan of any or all of these, but could you clarify? :p

The NAB I got. I prefer Toastchees myself.

I have mixed feelings about Raymond Brown. When I was in a Master's of Theology program some years back, I read a number of his works. I appreciated his scholarship, but at the time, it always seemed to me that he skirted orthodoxy as much as possible.

I went to see him speak during that time, and his talk was pretty vanilla. However, he was asked a question about the resurrection of Christ, and to his credit, he fully professed a belief in a literal, physical resurrection, which, sad to say, is rare among Biblical scholars (and the crowd appeared to be not in agreement with him on this point).

However, over the years, I have become more and more convinced that most modern biblical scholarship, focused on the historical critical methods and of which Raymond Brown was a prime proponent, is fundamentally flawed. Not simply because it mostly leads in a direction against orthodoxy, but because I think many of the methodologies have very flawed presuppositions behind them. Thus, I find much of the work of Raymond Brown to be not worth very much any more, and I would not recommend any of them to others.

I would agree with you on his later works. Some of his earlier works have many things which add value to Biblical study.

That is good that he did not deny the physical Resurrection of Christ. I have heard some homilies from the pulpit which seemed to "spiritualize it" or bring it into question.

If Christ is not raised from the dead, our faith is truly in vain!

I would tend to agree with your skepticism about the use modern higher-critical methodologies, although they have their insights frm time to time. I favor the patristic method of the Quadriga, myself.

Gordo

So Raymond Brown is now out. His works were the text books of the mid 70s. They were everywhere.

...to everything turn, turn, turn... :-)

Dear Friends,

I am currently reading his "Introduction to the New Testament."

But if you want truly orthodox biblical exegesis, read Orthodox biblical exegetes!

Isn't it ironic that EC's are in communion with Rome ostensibly to have their faith guarded by that "bastion of orthodoxy" - the See of Rome?

And yet we have to be on such guard against some of her famous theologians.

But things could be worse.

Alex

I also recommend reading Fr. William Most's "Free From All Error". You can still probably get this from the Daughters of St. Paul. Most quotes a book by Brown where Brown states that both Jesus and St. Paul were superstitious, based on some of the supernatural references in Paul's Epistles, and in the Gospels. Who needs to read such tripe? Brown (who has gone to his eternal reward, as has William Most-I wonder who is where, at this point? ) alleged to be "scientific", and, in his own work, disregarded both the Fathers and the Magisterium of the Church. It would seem to me that if you want to get an accurate understanding of Scripture, the Fathers are a more accurate source, since they are closer to the original events than any "modern" scholar. That's my "two cents".

Fr. Deacon Robert

Dear Father Deacon,

So you are saying that Brown was not "black and white" when it came to these issues?

Hmm . . .

See you later!

Alex

Ebed,

PBC=Peanunt Butter Cookies. You have to eat when you are studying so hard. Biblical Exegesis is hard work!

Laka,

ORRRRRR...

Peanut Butter Cups!

The perfect image of exegesis...we must "penetrate" the sweet and soft shell to the inner peanuty goodness of each pericope.

A must with a tall glass of milk.

I keep waiting for the Splenda versions...

:p :p :p Gordo

A post to this thread mentioned 'methodologies' of exegesis of Scripture. Now in a purely elementary laymans' point of view, I mostly remember something of the following, for those who are beginners:

1. Does what you read glorify God, the Father, Son and Holy Spirit...?
2. Will what you learn edify those who believe in the Father, the Only Begotten (and risen) Son, the Holy Spirit...?
3. Will what you expound agree with the Holy Scriptures and the ancient Tradition of the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church...?
4. Will what you decipher from your study lead one to Heaven (blessesness) or the Hell (judgement and damnation)...?

Now, this is very rudimentary, but except for part b. of #3, this is the rubric used by most of the Protestant evangelical world, of which I had spent 30 years of my adult life. Oh, one more thing I learned, that all reading of Scripture is worthless or even worse, IF...there is no intention of obedience to it. Therein lies the rub...obedience, for "rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft", according to the Prophet Samuel (in speaking to King Saul).
Anyway, may the Lord Himself bless us in the reading, AND, the application of His Word.
S Bohom, mik

Dear Friends,

My favourite saying of the Fathers on the study of scripture has to do with how we must first purify our hearts and attain holiness so we can be open to their true meaning.

Just as the eye, unencumbered, sees clearly what is before it, so too the mind, purified in the Holy Spirit, sees clearly the intent and meaning of the Holy Scriptures - so much so that there is no longer any aid for commentaries etc.

Alex

I agree. when I did a Masters in Biblical Studies at Temple Baptist Seminary, I too used Raymond Brown as a source. the material I used was orthodox, as far as the context of the paper was concerned. sometime ago,in this Forum, I mentioned Brown as a defender of orthodoxy, and I was amazed at the responses to that statement. I guess the whole thing boils down to what you are using Brown's works for. however, I am also aware of the Scripture that reads "a little leaven affects the whole lump" or something like that.
Much Love,
Jonn