by R. Salerno
 

Biblical  theologian, Maria Luisa Rigato was born in 1934 in Breslau, Germany, where she lived until 1945. This is the first student woman to be registered, October 12, 1965 in the Biblical Faculty of the Pontifical Biblical Institute of Rome, effect of Vatican II. From 1996 to 2005 she served on the Board of Directors of the Bible Society in Italy (SBI). From 1996 to 2005 she served on the Board of Directors of the Bible Society in Italy (SBI). On June 26, 2003 she is a founding member of the Italian Theological Coordination (CTI). Since 2001, professor of New Testament at the chair of "Women and Christianity" attached to the Pontifical Theological Faculty "Marianum", Rome. Since 2004 Visiting Professor of New Testament at the Pontifical Theological Faculty "Marianum", Rome. From 02 December 2004 she is coordinator of the New Testament Romans exegetes stable and / or transit to hold three annual meetings, choosing speakers and arguments to be covered.

From 31 January 2005, Consultant and member of the “Scientific Committee on the relics” of the Basilica of Santa Croce in Gerusalemme in Rome. From March 12, 2007 "Honorary Member" of the Italian Society for Theological Research (SIRT). From 31 January 2005, Consultant and member of the “Scientific Committee on the relics” of the Basilica of Santa Croce in Gerusalemme in Rome.

We asked to her some questions on the Holy Scriptures.

What challenges, with regard to implementation, the Word of God puts from the Dei Verbum to the Verbum Domini?

"The Verbum Domini would follow, as intended, Dei Verbum. This is, for me, very interesting. It is a text, a kind of biblical theology, which elaborates a bit too much in some passages in particular. One thing about it is that finally insists on the importance of the Word of God. Catholic circles we were not accustomed to picking up and reading the Bible, the prerogative of the Protestants. To my mind, one of the most important things is that the famous preachers should not mention other documents, if not the Bible. That is, the homily based on the texts that have been read."

How the exegetical and theological reflection  reflects herself and is reflected in the pastoral and ecumenical action and what should be done to make sliding this exchange?

"I think that we need both the figures. On the one hand, the commentators that can follow their charisma is that of exegetes and of interpreters. But it do not forget the pastoral part. The pastors should chew the Word of God, explained by the commentators and should make it attractive to people. And this is always the same problem. To clarify the concept I’m inspired by a personal example. If I write a book I have to document, and if my intention is to prove a thesis, I have to cite the texts to support what I’m saying. The same is valid and applies in this circumstance. When a pastor, a preacher had to repeat a particular concept, he must make it comparable and understandable to all the people. Because there is always a kind of gap between those who study the text and who at the end is the last receptor. By itself, an exegete must absolutely know the original languages ​​of the Bible. Thus, the Greek and Hebrew. Being acquainted with these languages not like Italian, but at least being able to search a specific word in the original and then to make an exegetical speech and then to forward it. They are two different gifts. The one is the research and the text’s understanding gift. The other is the charisma of the teacher."

From the standpoint of Christian Revelation, what kind of developments we have been in recent years and how they are interconnected with the deep demand for respect of the traditions and of the fidelity to the Scripture?

"We must distinguish between the Scripture and the Tradition. Some time ago I sent to the Corriere della Sera a question addressed to Cardinal Carlo Maria Martini in which I asked him what we mean by a living tradition, because this expression is often cited for example in the Verbum Domini in the chapter devoted to the exegetes. These are two different things. I distinguish clearly the apostolic tradition that ends with the Scriptures, that we Catholics accept as canonical. While another story is the living tradition that I did not understand what it is. For example, it is considered a living tradition in my Church the teaching of contempt toward the Jews, then abolished in Vatican Council II? Certainly not. Yet it has been taught for centuries as a tradition. For me it should start from here, beginning to organize a conference on Catholic tradition alive. Because there are several things that do not work, the result of bad exegesis and misinterpretation. And the bad exegesis often depends on a mistranslation.
As was the case of the first letter of John in which the Greek word ilasmos has been translated 'propitiation victim for our sins'. Translation totally wrong because it means 'forgiveness for our sins'. The meaning completely changes. This is happened because there were two categories to the origins of Christology. One that was traceable to such propitiation kind that we find in Matthew and in part in Paul. And the other is Johannine that Jesus died for love. Certainly Jesus is a sacrificial lamb, but depending on the interpretation he becomes the sacrificial lamb for the sin in a certain view. In John he becomes the sacrificial lamb of daily holocaust, that is a total praise. And so truthful. For frame of mind I’m a researcher and not a commentator who takes the comments and then puts them together. I call those goodies, I have happened many."

How to reconcile the biblical studies with the history and with the historical passages? It 's right that the sacred Scriptures is necessarily require a continuous adaptation to our social-historical reality or all of this can be a strained interpretation?

"By tradition, we can say that this is alive if I bring up the subject of Sacred Scripture well interpreted and updated in my time without betraying it. It 's clear that we need a specific preparation, the right tools, the methodologies. In this way, people follow the method that is more congenial. But Holy Scripture must be updated. You can not do a fundamentalist reading. Today there aren’t more animal’s sacrifices in the temple, although the book of Leviticus is not abolished. The holiness of God remains forever. Well-being, then, the various methods, but always keeping in mind that this is from the perspective of the believer of God's Word. That is of God's intervention in this story that needs to speak to me, living in the twenty-first century. "

What could be the contribution of consecrated persons in the divulging of the Scriptures to the faithful, what kind of preparation is required to them?

"I do not ask the question in these terms because even consecrated need, in turn, to study and learn. All must be fed of the Word of God. Then the person has a special relationship with the Word because it has time to do it because it is his mission.

So who has the task of studying the Word of God because he can, has a duty to feed his brother, who is married or ordained. I do not like the term consecrated, I prefer to say eunuch for the Kingdom of Heaven and it is true for men and women. Or even celibate for the Kingdom of Heaven. When Jesus says there are eunuchs  themselves made for the Kingdom of Heaven, and it is a charisma, a symbolic way of speaking in Matthew, in my opinion is true for men and women because it is a unique term."

Can you tell us in a historical-evolutionary how especially the female world is approached to the study of the Bible, with such contributions, with what results and what kind of changes that led to exegetical approach.

"On this subject I have written a lot since 1969. One thing is certain: perhaps the fruits are still unseen. Just the fact that we women have in hand the tools of the research, is to be seen in a positive light. I speak personally because I was lucky enough to be accepted at the Pontifical Biblical Institute in 1965, it gives me enormous pride. At present, more than forty years after completion of the work of Vatican II, it is clear that things have changed. Regardless of the document on the feminine genius. Persist in the Church delays against women on the basis of the tradition. For this reason, I ask myself to what tradition we refer.
When I attended the world conference for the presentation of Verbum Domini, I could ask a few questions during the various work sessions. One of these was headed by Monsignor Rino Fisichella, whom I respect very much and he was my colleague studying at the Gregorian. The question concerned the woman and the moment when she  could  proclaim the gospel during mass. The liturgist of Udine  responded me by saying that the Word of God is considered a sacrament, then it takes an ordained minister'. In room no one applauded the response of the session’s President.”

How to reconcile the Sacred Scriptures with scientific research? There are elements that lead to mutual reconciliation and an opportunity for improvement that can be drawing from both camps?

"I think so. I prefer the historical-critical method. It must be very careful because this method sometimes becomes too destructive and positivist. The Pope approves the historical-critical method, but he rails against exasperation. And this is absolutely right. Today there is news of this narrative-rhetorical method in which does not interest you the story but the text itself. For me it is not acceptable because it takes from the historical discourse and it considers in what context was born the text under consideration. Especially for us the women, this is very important. The scientific method, whatever it is, is compatible with Scripture. In any case, any biblical scholar would have written in large letters the words of Luke when Jesus spoke of the Scriptures to two disciples, one of whom was a woman in my opinion, starting with himself. This is what should be done: to search the Scriptures in the light of Jesus Christ. The Word grows with who is reading, as it is read. But before dealing with a text, we must pray. It also says the Verbum Domini, the Scripture must be interpreted in the same spirit with which it was written. The Holy Spirit is essential in the interpretation of texts. Not infrequently it happens that to write a sentence must be at least a day of study."

You were the first lay woman to graduate from the Pontifical Biblical Institute of the Gregorian University. Among the first to take the lead unfortunately to a no  long list of female figures who have been able to gain a prominent place in the Church and that includes, among others, the Augustinian nun, Mother Maria Rita Piccione, President of the Federation of his Religious Congregation, appointed by the Pope to write the text of the meditations for the Via Crucis this year. Has anything changed in the Church specifically for women, both lay and consecrated? The genius of women is still a pure utopia?

"I think there is some progress, including with regard to the religious women. Beginning with the veil. I have asked many times: what is the meaning of the veil? Someone told me the virginity. In my opinion it is not true. And also it is a question of witness. It is also a question of freedom. As St. Ignatius of Loyola, founder of the Society of Jesus, said that they have to walk the streets of the world with a decent suit of the moment, with simplicity and elegance. All this depends on poor exegesis. In particular, a misinterpretation of Paul to which is attributed the obligation of the veil for women. There's not this veil and I wrote about this in abundance because Paul speaks of the woman who has authoritative influence over her head. Authority is not in the sense that someone puts on, but she has arranged because of the angels. My exegesis of I Corinthians has as its core the allusion to the angels of the resurrection. Women have gained power on his head, in the sense of authoritative influence over man.  Christ, who is the head of man, is the image of God, not the male."