Without taking the extreme but fascinating position of Robert Carroll in his twenty-year-old study on Jeremiah in the Old Testament Library Commentary series (Westminster Press) - a book review here - Fr. Boadt agreed that the prophet began as a propagandist or advocate for the reforms of Josiah (2 Chronicles 34-36, 2 Kings 22), reforms which echo almost verbatim the language of the Deuteronomistic Historian.

It was great to see the textual parallels: Deut. 6:5 & 2 Kings 23:24-27. Jer. 7 picks up 2 Kings 23.

Fr. Boadt spoke favorably of Bill Holladay's Jeremiah commentary in the Hermeneia series from Fortress Press.

So, the extreme position, if you couldn't tease it out of the book review, is that Carroll posits that there was never a "Jeremiah". The Deuteronomists created a prophet to teach their theology. In 1:5-6, Jeremiah is portrayed as a new Moses and speaks of a new covenant.

I was reminded of my impression formed maybe two years ago, when I last heard Fr. Boadt lecture, my suspicion that St. Paul never really existed either. He models himself on Jeremiah so profoundly, the Apostle to the Gentiles called like the prophet to the nations. It would just be an interesting parallel, if Carroll is right about a school of theology producing a spokesperson, a prophet to proclaim their teaching, then who's to say that the Jewish Christians didn't imitate that in Paul.

It really dawned on me that I haven't studied these major books. Two years ago when I listened to Fr. Boadt discuss Amos, Hosea and Micah, I had studied them already. They are more manageable because of their size. So his goal was to pique our interest in these books and prompt us to take a closer look on our own. And that sounds like a good idea to me.