final paper for Who is Jesus?
to suggest the influence of Kacmardk on liturgical graphics in this country. Sometime treat yourself to leafing through the service books he designed for Benziger and Pueblo publishing companies. It is hard to come back to the crowded pages of other editions after reading and singing from his pages.
Kacmarcik's contributions to the Church have also taken three- dimensional forms in his redesigning and refurnishing of churches all over the land. A magnificent restoration of a nineteenth-century church in Sauk Center, Minnesota, a modern tower in Michigan, a new suburban church interior in Minneapolis, the altar of our semi- nary chapel in Texas, his work is found everywhere but most con- spicuously among those winning awards in church architecture competitions.
Worship has found a remarkable outward and visible form in Kac- marcik's covers. The treasures of his own personal library have often been poured forth in form of the steel engravings that have formed the basis of many recent covers. Photographs and line drawings add to the medley as Kacmarcik continues to teach us how to see. Let us hope that he will long continue to be our teacher.
Raymond E. Brown
The Meaning of the Manger; The Significance of the Shepherds
The Lucan story of Jesus' birth in Bethlehem (2:1-20) constitutes the Church's readings for the second and third Masses of Christmas day. In commenting upon it, let me first make some general remarks about its nature and origin, and then turn to individual details.
In the December 1975 Worship, in discussing the companion Matthean birth story (2:1-12), I stressed that the infancy narratives
Fr. Brown s.S. is Auburn Professor of Biblical Studies at Union Theological Semi- nary, New York. In 1972 he was the only American named by Pope Paul VI to the newly reconstituted Pontifical Biblical Commission. A past president of the Catholic Biblical Association, he is the current president of the Society of Biblical Literature. His full-scale commentary on the infancy narratives of Matthew and Luke, The Birth of the Messiah (Doubleday), will appear in autumn 1977.
Worship Jubilee
528
are one of the most difficult sections of the New Testament for mod- ern readers to understand, but at the same time one of the most rewarding. The easiest way to see both the difficulties and the wealth intrinsic to these narratives is to survey the chronological growth of pertinent scholarship. Let me summarize in a paragraph the analysis of three stages of growth which I gave in the previous article: [1] A realization that the birth material has a different origin from the material concerning Jesus' ministry — none of the apostolic eyewitnesses was present for the events narrated at Bethlehem. [2] A recognition that Matthew and Luke tell two very different stories of Jesus' conception, birth and infancy — stories that agree in very few details and almost contradict one another in other details. This, plus the recognition of the extent to which the infancy narratives echo Old Testament stories, raised doubt among most scholars about the historicity of the infancy narratives. [3] A renewal of inter- est in the theological value of the infancy narratives as magnificent vehicles of the good news of salvation. This more positive approach is the stage of present scholarship; and while it should not lead to a neglect of the historical difficulties, it is making a real contribution to the pastoral utility of these miniature gospels.
The title of last year's discussion of the Matthean birth narrative, "The Meaning of the Magi; the Significance of the Star," was meant to exemplify the concern of this present stage of scholarship in the import of the story. If I have given a parallel title to this article, it is not because of a strange fancy for symmetry, but because the fun- damental resemblance of the two narratives of Jesus' birth in Bethlehem is a key to understanding the import of the Lucan story. Let me emphasize that here, just as last year, I am confining myself to a portion of the second chapter of the Gospel, the portion that narrates with remarkable brevity the birth of Jesus at Bethlehem and the events that surrounded it. It is possible to concentrate on the second chapter thus because nothing in Luke 2:1-20 (or in Mt 2:1-12) presupposes anything that happened in Chapter One. The reader can test this by reading 2:1-20 and seeing how self-understandable the narrative is, even to the point of reintroducing and identifying Joseph and Mary as if nothing had been said of them previously. This has led many to argue that the material in Luke 2 was originally independent of the material in Luke 1, even as the Matthean story of the magi was probably once independent of the Matthean story of the dream visions of Joseph.
The Manger and the Shepherds
529
But if one leaves aside the question of origins and concentrates on the existing structure, the parallel patterns in Luke and Matthew are striking despite the very different story lines. In both Gospels Chap- ter One tells of an annunciation to one parent (to Joseph in Mat- thew; to Mary in Luke): an annunciation in which an angel of the Lord reveals the forthcoming birth of the child who will be the Mes- siah. Then in Chapter Two, after a brief reference to the birth of that child at Bethlehem, the story focuses in each Gospel upon the divine proclamation of the messianic birth to an audience. In Matthew the proclamation is to Gentile magi; in Luke it is to Jewish shepherds. Each group is guided by the revelation to come to Bethlehem, and there they find the child with the parent(s). The magi pay him hom- age and bring gifts; the shepherds praise God for all they have seen and heard. Then they both return to whence they came.
This similar structural pattern in two very different stories is quite intelligible if one recognizes that the christological development which I traced in explaining Matthew underlies Luke as well. Let me briefly remind the reader of that development. For early Christian preachers the christological revelation of Jesus' identity was attached to the resurrection. As God raised Jesus from the dead, Paul claims in Acts 13:33, the divine words in Psalm 2:7 found fulfillment: "You are my Son; today I have begotten you." However, in the progress of the Christian understanding of Jesus — a progress that moved "backwards" into his career — it was gradually perceived that Jesus did not become the Son of God through the resurrection but was already the Son of God in his public ministry. And so in Mark's Gospel (written after Paul's preaching) the psalm's words are at- tached not to the resurrection but to the baptism: "You are my be- loved Son" (Mk 1:11). In the Matthean and Lucan infancy narratives (written after Mark's Gospel) the christological insight is pressed back even farther into the career of Jesus, so that Jesus is presented as God's Son from the moment of his conception in the womb of the virgin Mary. Pertinent to this conception there now appears on the lips of an angel the same type of creedal formula that Paul once used for the resurrection: Romans 1:4: Designated Son of God in power according to the Holy
Spirit [Spirit of holiness] as of resurrection from the dead.
Luke 1:35: The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and power from
Worship Jubilee
530
the Most High will overshadow you. Therefore the child to be born will be called holy — Son of God.
Now if the christological insight of Jesus' identity has been moved back from the resurrection to the conception and birth, the aftermath of that christological revelation has also been retroverted. Histori- cally, when the good news was revealed through the resurrection, there was a sequence: it was proclaimed by preachers, and some of those who heard the proclamation believed and worshiped. So also in the second chapters of Matthew and Luke there is a proclamation of the christology revealed in Chapter One. It is a proclamation by a star to the magi and by an angel to the shepherds; and both shepherds and magi believe and worship.1 Even the departure of the shepherds and the magi is dictated by the logic of christological revelation. The two evangelists know that, when the public ministry of Jesus began, there was no surrounding chorus of adoring believ- ers, treasuring the memories of the marvels that surrounded the birth at Bethlehem. And so these forerunners of the later Christian believers have to be removed from the scene. The magi "went away to their own country," and the shepherds "returned" to their fields.
If the birth narratives of Matthew and Luke share the same chris- tology, they also share the tendency to dramatize that christology against a background of the Old Testament, mixed in with an antici- pation of Jesus' ministry. Let me show how Luke does this in 2:1-20.
The center of the narrative is the proclamation to the shepherds and their reaction, and Luke introduces this in two steps. In verses 1-5 he tells us of a census which brings Joseph and Mary to Bethlehem; and in verses 6-7 he tells us that while they were there, Mary gave birth to Jesus, swaddled him, and laid him in a manger.
Luke needs the story of the census because he believes that Mary and Joseph lived in Nazareth ("their own city," according to 2:39), and so he has to explain what they were doing in Bethlehem. (Mat- thew's problem was just the opposite: he pictured Mary and Joseph living in a house in Bethlehem [2:11], and he had to explain why
1 In Christian history there is also a negative reaction to the proclamation, i.e., of those who refuse to believe and then seek to destroy. In Matthew's infancy narrative these are represented by Herod, the chief priests, and the scribes; in Luke's infancy narrative it is prophesied that the child is set for Uve fall and rise of many in Israel and for a sign to be contradicted (2:34).
The Manger and the Shepherds
531
they moved to Nazareth, instead of returning from Egypt to Bethlehem [2:22-23].) There are formidable historical difficulties about every facet of Luke's description and dating of the Quirinius census, and most critical scholars acknowledge a confusion and misdating on Luke's part.2 Such a confusion would offer no difficulty to Catholics since Vatican II made it clear that what the Scriptures teach without error is the truth intended by God for the sake of our salvation,3 and that scarcely includes the exact date of a Roman census. But, faithful to the purpose of this article, let us con- centrate on the theological wealth that can be drawn from Luke's description of the census.
Luke speaks of an edict that went out from Augustus Caesar when Quirinius was governor of Syria. He thus gives the birth of Jesus a solemn setting, comparable to that which he would give the baptism of Jesus by John — under Tiberius Caesar when Pontius Pilate was prefect of Judea (3:1). In the instance of the baptism Luke was hinting that the ripples sent forth by the immersion of Jesus in the Jordan would ultimately begin to change the course of the Tiber. He is hinting at cosmic significance for the birth of Jesus as well. The name of Augustus would evoke memories and ideals for Luke's readers. In 29 B.C., one hundred years before Luke wrote this Gos- pel, Augustus had brought an end to almost a century of civil war that had ravaged the Roman realms; and at last the doors of the shrine of Janus in the Forum, thrown open in times of war, were able to be closed. The Age of Augustus was propagandized as the glorious age of pastoral rule over a world made peaceful by virtue — the fulfillment of Virgil's dreams in the Fourth Eclogue. In 13-9 B.C. there was erected a great altar to the peace brought about by Augus- tus, and this Ara Pacts Augustae still stands in Rome as a monument to Augustan ideals. The Greek cities of Asia Minor adopted Sep- tember 23rd, the birthday of Augustus, as the first day of the New
2 Minor difficulties are that there was no single census of the whole Roman Empire under Augustus, and that there is no evidence that Roman censuses required one to go to one's place of ancestry (unless one had property there). More serious is Luke's connection between the reign of Herod the Great (1:5) and the census under Quirinius. Herod died in 4 B.C.; Quirinius became governor in Syria and conducted the first Roman census of Judea in A.D. 6-7 — and notice it was a census of Judea, not of Galilee as Luke assumes. In Acts 5:37 Luke mistakenly mentions the revolt of Judas the Galilean (provoked by the census of Quirinius) after the revolt of Theudas which occurred in A.D. 44-46. See my commentary for detail.
3 Dogmatic Constitution Dei Verbum on Divine Revelation, III, 11.
Worship Jubilee
532
Year. He was hailed at Halicarnassus as the "savior of the whole world"; and the Priene inscription grandiosely proclaimed: "The birthday of the god marked the beginning of the good news for the world." Luke contradicts this propaganda by showing that paradox- ically the edict of Augustus served to provide a setting for the birth of Jesus. Men built an altar to the pax Augustae, but a heavenly chorus proclaimed the pax Christi: "On earth peace to those favored by God" (2:14). The birthday that marked the true beginning of a new time took place not in Rome but in Bethlehem, and a coun- terclaim to man-made inscriptions was the heraldic cry of the angel of the Lord: "I announce to you the good news of a great joy which will be for the whole people: To you this day there is born in the city of David a Savior who is Messiah and Lord" (2:10-11).
Luke's mention of the census would also have a meaning for readers who knew Jewish history. Past censuses had been causes of catastrophe. King David ordered a census for Israel and Judah (2 Sam 24) and incurred the wrath of God in the form of a pestilence. Most recently the census of Quirinius in Judea in A.D. 6-7 had pro- voked the rebellion of Judas the Galilean which was the beginning of the Zealot movement. It was this ultranationalistic movement which culminated in the Jewish revolt against Rome and the disas- trous destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70. Those evangelists who wrote after 70 were aware that Jewish revolutionary movements had "bad press" in the Roman Empire; and so Luke went out of his way in the passion account to insist that Pilate three times acknowledged Jesus' innocence of the political and revolutionary charges against him (23:4, 14, 22). Luke's picture of the census at Jesus' birth may have had the same goal. If Judas the Galilean revolted because of the Roman census under Quirinius, the parents of Jesus were obedient to it; thus even from birth Jesus was never a party to a rebellion against Rome. Instead of being a disaster for Roman-Je wish rela- tions, the census of Quirinius, if one understood it correctly, pro- vided the setting for the birth of a peaceful Savior who would be a revelation to the Gentiles and a glory for the people of Israel (2:32). Indeed, this was the census foretold in Psalm 87:6 where God says:4
"In the census of the peoples, this one will be born there."
4 The Hebrew of the psalm refers to the registering of people from various nations in Jerusalem which now becomes their spiritual home; the Septuagint refers to princes being born there; the (late) Aramaic targum speaks of a king being brought up there. I have cited the psalm according to Origen's Quinta or fifth Greek column,
The Manger and the Shepherds
533
The fulfillment of the Old Testament becomes a stronger motif when Luke moves on from the census to the actual birth, or rather to what Mary does after the birth (2:6-7). Like Matthew, Luke is laconic about the birth itself: simply, "She gave birth to a son, her first-born." What is of importance is the description which follows: "She swaddled him in strips of cloth and laid him down in a man- ger, since there was no place for them in the lodgings."5 Luke will keep coming back to this description, for the angels will tell the shepherds: "This will be your sign: You will find a baby swaddled in strips of cloth and lying in a manger" (2:12). The shepherds will know that they have come to their goal when they have found "Mary and Joseph, with the baby lying in the manger" (2:16). Specu- lations as to why there was no room in the lodgings erroneously distract from Luke's purpose, as do homilies about the supposed heartlessness of the unmentioned inn keeper or the hardship for the impoverished parents — equally unmentioned. Luke is interested in the symbolism of the manger, and the lack of room in the lodgings may be no more than a vague surmise in order to explain the men- tion of a manger. This manger is not a sign of poverty but is proba- bly meant to evoke God's complaint against Israel in Isaiah 1:3: "The ox knows its owner and the donkey knows the manger of its lord; but Israel has not known me, and my people has not understood me." Luke is proclaiming that the Isaian dictum has been repealed. Now, when the good news of the birth of their Lord is proclaimed to the shepherds, they go to find the baby in the manger and begin to praise God. In other words, God's people have begun to know the manger of their Lord.6
To modern romantics the shepherds described by Luke take on the gentleness of their flock and have even become Christmas sym-
which we now suspect was an early recension of the Greek, somewhat parallel to the kaige revision of the Septuagint known to us through Dead Sea discoveries (see The Jerome Biblical Commentary, article 69, nos. 57, 60, 61). D. Barthélémy, Les devanciers d'Aquila (Leiden: Brill 1963) 148, argues that Luke may have known the Quinta Greek version.
5 It is probable that phatnê is better translated by "manger" than by "stall"; it is quite unclear whether katalyma means "the home," "the room," or "the inn."
6 This suggestion is well defended by C. H. Giblin, Catholic Biblical Quarterly 29 (1967) 87-101. He suggests that Luke's reference to the lodgings echoes Jeremiah 14:8, addressed to the Lord and Savior of Israel, "Why are You like an alien in the land, like a traveler who stays in lodgings?" For Luke this dictum too is repealed, for the Lord and Savior of Israel no longer stays in lodgings.
Worship Jubilee
534
bols for the common man.7 But such interests are again foreign to Luke's purpose. The basic Old Testament background seems to be the memory that David was a shepherd in the area of Bethlehem — the city Luke refers to as "the city of David." The mention of the shepherds' flock (2:8) may betray more complicated biblical reflec- tions. The primary passage used to relate the Messiah's birth to Bethlehem is Micah 5:i[2]: "And you, O Bethlehem Ephrathah, small to be among the clans of Judah, from you there will come forth for me one who is to be a ruler in Israel." In the immediate context Micah mentions Migdal Eder, the "Tower of the Flock," which he identifies with Jerusalem/Zion: "O Tower of the Flock, hill of the Daughter of Zion, to you will come back the former dominion, the kingdom of the Daughter of Zion" (4:8). Now, it is noteworthy that Luke has shifted over to Bethlehem a terminology formerly applied to Jerusalem/Zion. In 2:4 he tells us, "Joseph went up from Galilee . . . into Judea to the city of David which is called Bethlehem." Not only is the verb "go u p " a standard Old Testament expression for ascent to Jerusalem, but Jerusalem is "the city of David," never Bethlehem. Has Luke also shifted over the designation "Tower of the Flock" (Migdal Eder) from Jerusalem to Bethlehem, so that Micah's promised restoration of the former kingdom and dominion has not been fulfilled in Bethlehem? This would explain the em- phasis in the proclamation given to the shepherds who are pasturing their flock near Bethlehem: "To you this day there is born in the city of David a Savior who is Messiah and Lord" (2:11) — a proclamation to which they respond, "Let us go over to Bethlehem and see the event that has taken place" (2:15).
Other evidence supports this suggestion that the Lucan mention of the shepherds and their flock may be associated with reflection upon Bethlehem as the Tower of the Flock. The only other biblical reference to Migdal Eder, the "Tower of the Flock," besides Micah 4-5, is Genesis 35:19-21, where after Rachel has died on the way to Ephrath, that is, Bethlehem, Jacob journeys on to Migdal Eder. In his infancy narrative Matthew used both Micah 5 and Genesis 35:19 by way of reflection on the birthplace of Jesus,8 so it is not impossi- ble that these two passages which mention both Bethlehem and
7 Later rabbinic writings often considered shepherds as dishonest, for they grazed their flocks on other people's lands (Babylonian Talmud, Sanhédrin 25b).
8 Mt 2:5-6 directly cites Micah 5:1(2); and Mt 2:17-18 presupposes Gen 35:19 where Rachel dies on the road to Bethlehem.
The Manger and the Shepherds
535
Migdal Eder were part of an earlier reflection on the Messiah — per- haps an earlier Christian reflection antedating both Matthew and Luke, or perhaps a pre-Christian Jewish reflection. In a passage that can scarcely have been borrowed from Christians, the Targum Pseudo-Jonathan9 offers as an Aramaic translation of Genesis 35:21: "The Tower of the Flock, the place from which it will happen that the King Messiah will be revealed at the end of days/7
The Lucan story has a twofold proclamation of the Messiah by angels. The first and most important is: "I announce to you good news of a great joy which will be for the whole people: To you this day there is born in the city of David a Savior who is Messiah and Lord" (2:10-11). We have seen that this proclamation echoes in its style the imperial propaganda of Augustus, but Luke has borrowed the precise titles from his accounts of early Christian preaching. In Acts 2:32, 36 Peter says that God raised Jesus and "made him both Lord and Messiah"; in Acts 5:31 he says that God exalted Jesus as "Savior." Now that the christological understanding has been moved back from the resurrection to the conception/birth, the same titles are applicable to the newborn child.
The second angelic proclamation is of a different nature; it is the canticle Gloria in Excelsis (2:13-14):
Glory in the highest heavens to God, and on earth peace to those favored by Him.
This is one of the four poetic canticles in the Lucan infancy narrative; like the other three (Magnificat, Benedictus, Nunc Dimittis) its struc- tural connection with its immediate context is very loose.10 A good case can be made for the thesis that Luke added these canticles after he wrote the main body of the infancy narrative, and that they came to him already composed from a collection of hymns sung by Jewish Christians in praise of what God had done in the death and resur- rection of Jesus.11 A very close parallel to the Gloria is found in the praise sung by the disciples as Jesus enters Jerusalem to begin his passion (Lk 19:38):
9 The dating of this targum is uncertain, and in its present form it may be as late as the third century A.D.
10 One can omit the canticles in 1:46-55; 1:67-79; and 2:28-33 and never miss them. This is also true of 2:13-14 if one reads "angel" rather than "angels" in 2:15, as do some Old Latin witnesses.
11 In this thesis Luke would have added a few lines to the canticles, such as 1:48 and 1:76-77 (lines remarkably Lucan in style), in order to adapt them to their present setting.
Worship Jubilee
536
Peace in heaven and glory in the highest heavens.
These may even be antiphonally recited lines of the same hymn, with the heavenly host imagined as proclaiming peace on earth, while the disciples proclaim peace in heaven. Jewish scholars have recognized a similarity between the Gloria sung in honor of Jesus and the Sanctus sung by the seraphim to the Lord of Hosts in the Jerusalem Temple (Is 6:3), especially when we realize that in Jewish prayer tradition each of three "Holies" ("holy, holy, holy") was ex- panded: "Holy in the highest heavens; . . . holy on earth, etc."1 2 If the Gloria resembles the Sanctus, Luke is again shifting the focus from Jerusalem to Bethlehem: the hosts of angels have moved from the Temple to praise the new presence of the Lord in Bethlehem.
The Lucan birth scene closes with the reactions of three different participants (2:15-20). First, there are the shepherds, the main characters of the birth scene, who come and find the angelic sign verified: the infant Messiah lies in the manger. As I have explained above, they symbolize an Israel who at last recognizes its Lord; and they glorify and praise God for all they have seen and heard (2:17, 20).13 Second, Luke introduces unexpectedly a group of hearers who are astonished at all the shepherds report (2:18). Astonishment is a standard reaction in the Gospel (see also 1:21, 63; 2:33), and it does not necessarily lead to faith. These hearers in the infancy narrative are like those in the parable of the seed who "hear the word, receive it with joy, but have no root" (Lk 8:13).
But there is one exception among the astonished hearers, and she constitutes the third participant in the scene, namely Mary who "kept with concern all these events, interpreting them in her heart" (2:19). She is not above being astonished (2:33), but her hearing is more perceptive. In the same parable of the seed she exemplifies "Those who, hearing the word, hold it fast in an honest and good heart" (8:15).14 Luke's description of Mary keeping with concern all these events has often been misused for the implausible thesis that
12 See D. Flusser, "Sanktus und Gloria/' in Abraham unser Vater, ed. O. Betz et al. (Festschrift O. Michel; Leiden: Brill 1963) 129-152.
13 Bystanders glorify and praise God for what they have seen and heard both in the Gospel (Lk 7:16; 13:13; 17:15; 18:45; 19:37) a n d i n Ac*s (2:47; 3:&-9; 4:21; 11:18; 21:20).
14 Mary makes her only appearance in the Lucan Gospel account of the public ministry immediately after these words (8:19-21) and is praised for hearing the word of God and doing it.
The Manger and the Shepherds
537
she narrated the infancy narrative to Luke.15 The idea of "keeping events with concern" appears in Genesis 37:11; Daniel 4:28; and Tes- tament of Levi 6:2, not with any suggestion of eyewitness tradition, but for attempts to discover the hidden meaning behind marvelous happenings. The Lucan Mary is making a similar attempt, and Luke mentions this because Mary is the only adult in his infancy narrative who will last into the public ministry and even into the Church. In the Gospel (8:21) she will appear with the "brothers" of Jesus among those who hear the word of God and do it, and in Acts (1:14) she will again appear with the "brothers" of Jesus as part of the believ- ing community awaiting Pentecost. Thus Luke knows that Mary must have sought to interpret these events surrounding the birth of Jesus and ultimately have succeeded, for she became a model Chris- tian believer.
15 The implausibility is most visible when we consider Lucan inaccuracies about the census and the customs of presentation and purification.
Chronicle
L I T U R G I A S E M P E R R E F O R M A N D A
"In order that tradition be retained, and yet the way remain open to legitimate progress, a careful investigation — theological, historical, and pastoral — should always be made into each part of the liturgy which is to be revised."
How well was this prescription of the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy of Vatican II (23), with regard to liturgical reform, observed in the revision of the rites?
There can be no doubt that the revision of the rites was based on adequate theological and historical research. But what about the pre- scribed pastoral research? Those responsible for the revision of the rites certainly did engage in pastoral research of a sort. There was wide consultation of people with pastoral experience concerning the advisability of contemplated reforms, and provisionally elaborated rites were tested in certain designated centers.
But "pastoral" means people. The methodologies of contemporary human sciences provide scientific means of studying people and their ritual behavior. Some of us have been much concerned, for the last ten years, about the relative failure to exploit these methodologies in liturgical reform.
Worship Jubilee
538
^ s
Copyright and Use:
As an ATLAS user, you may print, download, or send articles for individual use according to fair use as defined by U.S. and international copyright law and as otherwise authorized under your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement.
No content may be copied or emailed to multiple sites or publicly posted without the copyright holder(s)' express written permission. Any use, decompiling, reproduction, or distribution of this journal in excess of fair use provisions may be a violation of copyright law.
This journal is made available to you through the ATLAS collection with permission from the copyright holder(s). The copyright holder for an entire issue of a journal typically is the journal owner, who also may own the copyright in each article. However, for certain articles, the author of the article may maintain the copyright in the article. Please contact the copyright holder(s) to request permission to use an article or specific work for any use not covered by the fair use provisions of the copyright laws or covered by your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement. For information regarding the copyright holder(s), please refer to the copyright information in the journal, if available, or contact ATLA to request contact information for the copyright holder(s).
About ATLAS:
The ATLA Serials (ATLAS®) collection contains electronic versions of previously published religion and theology journals reproduced with permission. The ATLAS collection is owned and managed by the American Theological Library Association (ATLA) and received initial funding from Lilly Endowment Inc.
The design and final form of this electronic document is the property of the American Theological Library Association.