Vetter, Paul Alexander

VETTER, PAUL ALEXANDER. - Catholic Armenologist and exegete, b. 14 July 1850 in Oberdettingen (near Biberach, Württemberg), d. at Tübingen on 21 Sept. 1906.

From 1868 he studied philosophy and theology at the Wilhelmsstift in Tübingen, and at the same time philology, in which he took his degree there in 1872. A priest from 1873, he was a tutor in the same institute in 1881; then parish priest at Weiler near Rottenburg; but he did not interrupt his studies, copying and collating Armenian manuscripts in Paris. The Kirchenväterkommission of Berlin entrusted him with the treatment of the ancient Armenian Christian writers, and in J. Nirschl's Lehrbuch der Patrologie und Patristik (III, Mainz 1881, pp. 206-62) he treated masterfully of the Syriac and Armenian writers. In 1891 he was given the chair of introduction and exegesis of the Old Testament at Tübingen. Appointed professor, he did not cease to study the Armenian manuscripts, making further journeys to Paris and to S. Lazzaro in Venice (v. MECHTARISTI), and on them he published valuable articles in the Theologische Quartalschrift (v.) of Tübingen and in the Oriens christianus (v.), in the early years in Rome. He had already published in Latin version Chosroae Magni episcopi monophysitae explicatio precum Missae (Freiburg 1880). In the exegetical field he published only one book: Metrik des Buches Job (Freiburg 1897), important then, today of merely historical value because of the overly complicated theory of the «caesuras». On other biblical questions he pronounced in articles and extensive reviews in the Theol. Quartalschrift and the Biblische Zeitschrift; of value is his study on the «romance» of Ahiqar (v.) in relation to the book of Tobit. He had courageous words on the occasion of the Babel-Bibel controversy, a violent and exaggerated outbreak of the new research on the cuneiform texts, too long unused for clarifying the historical and religious environment of Israel, it being claimed that mythism and faith in Revelation mutually exclude each other. Less happy, although moved by the best intention, was his position on the problem of the Pentateuch (v.). Emphasizing the thesis of F. v. Hummelauer's famous book, Exegetisches zur Inspirationsfrage (Freiburg 1903), he maintained that «the inerrancy conditioned by the inspired character of the Bible» does not exclude its imperfection («Unvollkommenheit») in the field of the profane sciences, a thesis that conflicts with the encyclical Spiritus Paraclitus (v.). Associating himself with the «broad and progressive» school, as regards the Pentateuch he did not admit the argument drawn from the divine names; moreover P is for him earlier than the prophet Amos and D earlier than the prophet Hosea. But he admitted as necessary for the salvation of the Church a «Catholic criticism of the Pentateuch», which would accept in substance the documents upheld by the critics, but reject the substance of the religious evolution of Israel, advocated by Wellhausen according to rationalistic principles. The decree of the Biblical Commission on the Pentateuch (cf. Denz-U, nn. 1997-2000) came (27 June 1906) when V. was already on his deathbed.

Pietro Nober