We can proclaim a middle ground between Vulgate texts, which are the Roman Catholic Church’s reliance as the guardian of Apostolic teaching, and Nomadic texts, a brainchild of Breenan Breed that texts evolve in meaning across contexts. The solution lies in agreeing that Scripture and Church Tradition are interdependent, not opposed. And that Bible’s nomadic nature does not negate Church’s role in preserving its core message.

 

The Roman Catholic Church insists that the teachings of Jesus Christ was passed down through sacred tradition and Scripture as Christ entrusted to his apostles. And through the guidance of the holy spirit, the  Church serves as the guardian and authentic interpreter of this deposit of faith.  This view emphasizes that the living authority of the Church in preserving and interpreting revelation, the unity of Scripture and Tradition as complementary, not competing sources of divine truth and the stability of doctrine over time, despite historical and cultural shifts.

 

However, Breed, who was influenced by Walter Brueggemann’s work and postmodern hermeneutics, argues that biblical texts are not fixed in meaning but are nomadic and constantly reinterpreted in new contexts. He emphasizes that texts are plurivalent, with multiple meanings across different communities and times. Also, the meaning of the text is not solely original intent but emerges in the encounter between the text and the reader. Breed promotes that Scripture is a living, dynamic tradition, not a static artefact.

 

Is there a way to reconcile these perspectives? Yes, if we consider that the Church as the interpretive Community. The Catholic Church does not deny that Scripture is read in different contexts, but it insists that the magisterium ensures continuity with apostolic teaching. Breed’s “nomadic” view could be seen as describing how Scripture remains alive in the life of the Church, without necessarily undermining doctrinal stability. As a development and not contradiction, John Henry Newman’s theory of doctrinal development suggests that while the Church’s understanding deepens over time, it remains consistent with apostolic truth. Similarly, Breed’s approach allows for new meanings within a tradition, not necessarily against it. As both fixed and living, Scripture or biblical text itself has a stable form (canon), but its interpretation unfolds under the guidance of the Spirit (John 16:13). The Catholic Church affirms this dynamic in its exegesis, distinguishing between literal and spiritual senses of Scripture.

 

Grounded in both Church and Scripture, a middle ground is possible if we recognize the apostolic teaching is indeed preserved in the Church. However, its articulation and application are dynamic, as seen in ecumenical councils, encyclicals, etc. Scripture is “nomadic” in the sense of being fruitful for new insights, but the Church provides the normative framework for interpretation. Thus, the apostolic faith is not either in the Church or in the text alone, it is a living tradition where Scripture, interpreted within the Church, remains the inspired and authoritative witness to Christ. The “nomadic” nature of texts does not negate the Church’s role but highlights how the Spirit continually renews understanding within the apostolic faith.