One of the great achievements of modern scholarship [...] has been the realization that it cannot simply be assumed that the texts of the past are immediately accessible to modern minds and that a certain effort is necessary to retrieve authentic meanings. Obviously it is this crucial scholarly insight that the Council endorsed.

[I]t extends merely to the possibility of modern misunderstanding -- the misconstrual of certain words, insensitivity to the nuances of certain figures of speech, failure to recognize allusions to other biblical passages -- not to the supposed errors of the evangelists who wrote the texts.

Dei Verbum (19) reminds the faithful that:

"Holy Mother Church has firmly and with absolute constancy held, and continues to hold, that the four Gospels just named, whose historical character the Church unhesitatingly asserts, faithfully hand on what Jesus Christ, while living among men, really did and taught for their eternal salvation .... The sacred authors ... told us the honest truth about Jesus."

How can a text said to embody God’s own revelation to His people, claimed as essential to one’s salvation, acknowledged to be infinitely beyond the ability of the human mind to comprehend, be treated simply as another literary genre?

In “proving” the divine authority of Scripture, the Second Vatican Council (DV, I, l) cited the text of Scripture itself, a method of exegesis that would be outrageous if applied to any other document.

Dei Verbum: The Divine Authority of Scripture vs. the 'Hermeneutic of Suspicion', Adoremus, Dr. James Hitchcock