Bibliographic record
Abstract
Reviewed by: Convergences: Canon and Catholicity by Christopher R. Seitz Donald Senior christopher r. seitz, Convergences: Canon and Catholicity ( Waco, TX: Baylor University Press, 2020). Pp. x + 189. $34.95. "Convergences" is surely the right title for this thoughtful work by Christopher R. Seitz, professor of biblical interpretation at Wycliff College, University of Toronto. He begins with an autobiographical note, explaining that the need for specialized surgery for his wife in France brought him into intimate contact with French Catholicism and French biblical scholarship. S., an ordained Episcopalian priest, and his wife were welcomed by a vibrant Catholic parish in France—a first and happy convergence. And during his time there he also was introduced to the work of the late Paul Beauchamp, a French Jesuit whose interest in canonical interpretation of the Bible harmonized with S.'s own appreciation for the contributions of Brevard Childs—even though Childs and Beauchamp never directly interacted. French biblical scholarship, S. observes, has never been as enthralled with German university influence and its emphasis on historical-critical methodology as British and [End Page 710] American scholars have been, and has given more attention to patristic biblical interpretation, providing an opening to the more synchronic and theological perspectives championed by Childs. This leads to the main set of "convergences" that command the attention of this book. S.'s overarching concern is the inner relationship—or convergence—between the modern emphasis on the historical context of biblical books (S.'s main focus is on OT literature), the Bible viewed organically and theologically as Scripture and the Word of God, and the reception or the abiding lines of interpretation of the Bible by faithful Christians over the centuries. A recurring dialogue partner for S. throughout the book is modern Catholicism, with its own struggle to absorb historical-critical methodology and its attention to the canonical form of the Scriptures and the role of "living tradition" in biblical interpretation. As S. puts it, "The line we are pursuing is whether canonical reading may serve as a kind of bridge between historical-critical reading in its classic mode and the concerns articulated in the decades following the 1943 encyclical [i.e., Pius XII's Divino Afflante Spiritu], leading into Vatican II, and then into kindred developments that followed the close of the Council's work" (p. 15). Those "kindred developments" include recognition of both the value and the limits of historical criticism; renewed attention to patristic interpretation; acknowledgment of the importance of canonicity; and—what turned out to be something of a surprising yet fruitful outcome of the Council—the creation of a common Lectionary. Seitz will pursue these cross-currents and convergences under various topics: authorship and inspiration understood in view of the various strands of tradition and reinterpretation woven into the fabric of the Pentateuch and other biblical books; the use of figural interpretation in relating the New Testament to the Old; the attempt to articulate a biblical theology; the incorporation of wisdom motifs into the revelatory story of Israel; and the significance of the Lectionary as a means of bringing the Scriptures to the Christian people and the mode of interpretation that the juxtaposition of Old and New Testament texts implies. Coursing through all of these examples is S.'s strong theological and ontological view of the Scriptures as a whole—both Old and New Testaments—as the canon, forged ultimately through God's Spirit and, in the view of Christian faith, having Christ as its ultimate goal and underlying rationale. Here is where both Childs and his kindred spirit, Paul Beauchamp, help inform S.'s own view. He clearly realizes that the OT writings have a life of their own and are formed and shaped by a particular originating historical context and, in most cases, over time subject to reinterpretation and refashioning within the community of Israel itself. The endpoint of Scripture in Christ was not part of the biblical author's conscious intent, but the theological underpinning of the Scriptures as a whole validates the discovery of the ultimate meaning of earlier events in the Christ-event. One of S.'s prime examples to illustrate that complex and rich connection is the Passover...
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".