The almost sixty-year struggle to incorporate the historical-critical method into the framework of biblical exegesis testifies to the power of faith in scientific inquiry—and indeed to the power of words. The drama and intensity of the conflict resulted from the period conviction that objective knowledge could be acquired, that truth could be attained and expressed, and that it was possible to build upon the truth. Thus, paradoxically, the historical-critical method could be viewed within the church as both a gift, a magnificent instrument for comprehending not only the biblical text but the whole of tradition, and a threat, an enemy weapon capable of annihilating the very basis of ecclesiastical tradition by questioning its origins and authenticity. And even if the fears of its detractors were not realized, a problem remained. How was it possible to provide a legitimate interpretation of scripture using the very tools applied to any other ancient text?
The problem of applying modern research tools to biblical scholarship is still a thorny one in certain quarters. The Protestant and Catholic churches remain divided on the subject—not so much among themselves as internally, or between particular denominations and sometimes also generations. The scientific nature of these investigations is still a source of embarrassment for some Christians, who worry about where they might lead. It is not hard to detect a rift of sorts between the ecclesiastical elites of traditional churches, who typically accept the benefit and necessity of scientifically rigorous criticism, and certain laity for whom such studies are blasphemous and corrosive. There has been, moreover, a resurgence of fundamentalism within Christianity, radically rejecting any form of critical study in favor of a completely literal reading of the Bible. One need only consider the growing influence of extreme evangelicalism around the world, or even the waves of fashionable conservatism lapping at the margins of the Catholic Church. Even now, it would be premature to speak of this chapter in Christian history as definitively closed.
This book, as I have said, will examine an important aspect of Catholic exegetical history—namely, the emergence of modern biblical scholarship in light of the church’s reaction to the dynamic development of the social and natural sciences during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. The freedom to pursue new techniques in the study of scripture (including historical- criticism) was only obtained with difficulty. The renaissance in Catholic exegesis came about after a long series of tribulations, victimizations, and tragic errors that slowed its progress for decades. This oppressive atmosphere was gradually dispelled after the adoption of the dogmatic constitution Dei Verbum in 1965. Pope John Paul II was to compare this situation to the maltreatment of Galileo. “Some, in their effort to defend the faith, considered it necessary to reject historical conclusions built on solid foundations. This was a hasty and unhappy decision. The work of pioneers like Father Lagrange has made it possible to make distinctions on the basis of dependable criteria."
While our book focuses on the history of Catholic biblical scholarship, Catholic theology more broadly considered, and contributions made to exegetical developments by Czech scholars, we could well expand the horizon of our attentions to include a host of interrelated issues in historiography—the relationship of church and society at the turn of the twentieth century; the question of modernism in Catholicism; the process of modernizing church teachings and institutions in an era of turbulent social change; the relationship between authorities and the individual; the freedom of individual conscience when compromised by the institution’s demands for loyalty and conformity; the autonomy of theological scholars when their findings appear to question formerly undoubted and undeniable points of ecclesiastical and theological tradition—to name only a few. It can be asserted with justice that the church’s attitudes to modern scholarship epitomize the complicated relationship between the church and modernity in general. The church’s decisions in this problem and others inevitably determined the course of many thousands of lives for decades afterward.
