Dominic RussoMr. LaceJunior Theology CP4 May 201425th Sunday of Ordinary TimeAccording to the Pontifical Biblical Commission's Document, The Interpretation of the Bible in the Church:"The historical-critical method is the indispensable method for the scientific study of the meaning of ancient texts. Holy Scripture, inasmuch as it is the "word of God in human language," has been composed by human authors in all its various parts and in all the sources that lie behind them. Because of this, its proper understanding not only admits the use of this method but actually requires it."This quote from The Interpretation of the Bible in the Church is saying that it is not suggested to use the historical-critical method, rather it is required to use it to interpret Scripture. It also states that it is the only method for scientifically studying the meaning of ancient texts. When using the historical-critical method you have to take into mind three things. One is textual criticism, which is examining a text's original language or if there were different translations of the particular text. The second is source criticism, which is examining the written or oral sources of the text or how it parallels with another text. The third is form criticism, which is examining the genre of the particular text. In my paper I will analyze the readings from the 25th Sunday of Ordinary Time, which are Isaiah 55:6-9, Philippians 1:20C-24, 27A, and Matthew 20:1-16A. I will use source criticism to examine Isaiah 55:6-9. I will use textual criticism to examine Philippians 1:20C-24,27A. I will use form criticism to examine Matthew 20:1-16A. I will then use the information I gathered to determine what God is trying to communicate with the world through these three Scripture passages. In these passages from the Scriptures, God is speaking to the Church today and saying that you cannot blame others for being generous, we were made to benefit one another, and that his plans for us are beyond human knowledge and spirituality.Matthew 20:1-16A is a story about Jesus telling his disciples a parable. In this parable Jesus compares the kingdom of heaven to a landowner looking for workers, he said:"The kingdom of heaven is like a landowner who went out at dawn to hire laborers for his vineyard." (Mt.20:1)In comparing the kingdom of heaven to a landowner who went out to hire workers, Jesus says that the landowner went out at dawn, at nine, and at five. At dawn he hires some people for the usual daily wage. At nine he sees more people and hires them for the usual daily wage. At five he asks why the people are standing there, they say that nobody has hired them yet. So he then proceeds to hire them for the usual daily wage. When the evening comes the landowner tells his foreman to summon the laborers and pay them beginning with the last and ending with the first. When the first laborers came to get their pay, they expected to get paid a little more than the laborers who had only been working for a few hours. When they received the same pay as the others, they became mad at the landowner. The landowner in response said: "He said to one of them in reply, 'My friend, I am not cheating you. Did you not agree with me for the usual daily wage? Take what is yours and go. What if I wish to give this last one the same as you?[Or] am I not free to do as I wish with my own money? Are you envious because I am generous?'" (Mt.20:13-15)He is saying to the laborers that he did not cheat them because they agreed to work for the usual daily wage. He is saying to them that they cannot blame him for being generous. What Jesus' message might have been is that when a person makes an agreement with another person, that person cannot expect to get more then what was originally agreed on. This ties in to the parable because the laborers wanted more than what was agreed on. Also the message of this story might have been that you cannot blame as person for their generousness.Philippians 1:20C-24,27A was most likely written in Greek. The writer of the letters to the Philippians, Paul, was born in a city where the main language was Greek. According to oxfordbiblicalstudies.com:"He was born in the Greek‐speaking city of Tarsus in Cilicia" (oxfordbiblicalstudies.com)This is significant because while translating it from Greek to English there might have been a mistake or there might have been different translations of a certain word. One phrase from the letters is:"Yet that I remain in the flesh is more necessary for your benefit" (Phil 1:24)In this phrase Paul is telling the Philippians that he is alive for their benefit. This is significant because in Greek this is translated to "for the sake of". According to a translation on biblehub.com:"Di' is translated to 'for the sake of'" (biblehub.com)This is important because when "for the sake of" is used it gives a feeling of something somewhat serious. For instance, when a general manager makes a move for the sake of the team, it is usually something solves a serious problem. So when "for the sake of" is used in this passage it kind of connotes that Paul is saying that without him something bad will happen to the Philippians. Rather when "for your benefit" is used it does not really connote something negative, but it kind of connotes something that is positive. When that is used it feels almost as if the Philippians are not doing well but they are not doing bad. So by Paul being alive he is going to help them. What God might be saying is that people are on Earth to be beneficial to another person or in this case a group of people.Isaiah 55 is the last book of what is known as Second Isaiah or Deutero-Isaiah. This section of the book of Isaiah spans from Isaiah 40 to 55. This was not written by the prophet Isaiah, but by one of his successors. Despite having many differences from First Isaiah, which is also known as Proto-Isaiah(Is. 1-39), there is are multiple things that remain very similar between the two. According to oxfordbiblicalstudies.com:"The reason that Second Isaiah can be called his legitimate successor, despite his differences from First Isaiah, is that he had the same view of the judgment process as First Isaiah"(oxfordbiblicalstudies.com)This says that the two sections of Isaiah view the judgment process the same way. Another way in which the two are similar is the divine plan. According to oxfordbiblicalstudies.com:"The divine plan in chapters 40 through 55 is a mirror image of the plan in chapters 1 through 39 , which accounts for the correspondences between the two prophets. It is the mirror imaging of the main points of the message of one prophet in the other that one most readily senses the continuity between them."(Oxfordbiblicalstudies.com)These two similarities might be suggesting that Deutero-Isaiah might have used Proto-Isaiah as a source for many of its writings. One thing about Deutero-Isaiah and Proto-Isaiah is that throughout the two there are many different words used for the Lord's "plan" or "work". According to oxfordbiblicalstudies.com:"Of the many possible ways of approaching the theology of Isaiah of Jerusalem, one of the most fruitful is to examine his understanding of the Lord's "plan" or "work." There are many synonyms for the divine plan or work in Isaiah and in Second Isaiah."(oxfordbiblicalstudies.com)This relates to Isaiah 55:6-9 because the writer of Deutero-Isaiah uses one of the many synonyms for the Lord's "plan" or "work". In Isaiah 55 the writer wrote:"For my thoughts are not your thoughts, nor are your ways my ways-oracle of the LORD. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, my thoughts higher than your thoughts."(Isaiah 55:8-9)The synonym used here is "thoughts", according to oxfordbiblicalstudies.com:'"thoughts (plans)" ( 55, 8-9 )"(oxfordbiblicalstudies.com)In other words his plans are not your plans and his plans are higher than your plans. What he could mean by that is that his plans are beyond what man can do.In this paper I used the historical-critical method to make do an exegetical analysis, which is the interpretation of a text, of the readings from the 25th Sunday in Ordinary Time. I matched each of the readings with one of the three criticisms, form, textual, or source, and tried to interpret what the message from God was in each of the passages. For Matthew 20, using form criticism, I made the interpretation that Jesus was trying to tell his apostles to not blame people for being generous and to expect to more than what was agreed on. For Isaiah 55, using source criticism, I made the interpretation that God is telling everybody that what he has planned is something beyond human abilities. For Philippians 1, using textual criticism, I made the interpretation that God put everyone on Earth to be beneficial to another person or a group of people.Works Cited"Is 55:6-9, Phil 1:20C-24,27A, Mt 20:1-16" Usccb.org Web"The Interpretation of the Bible in the Church" http://www.ewtn.com/library/curia/pbcinter.htm Web."Oxford Biblical Studies Online"oxfordbiblicalstudies.comWeb."Phil. 1:20C-24,27A interlinear" http://biblehub.com/interlinear/philippians/1-24.htm Web.
