Here’s a traditional Catholic response, from the Pontifical Biblical Commission under Pope St. Pius X (1906):
Question I. Whether the arguments accumulated by critics to impugn 1997 the Mosaic authenticity of the Sacred Books, which are designated by the name of Pentateuch, are of such weight that, in spite of the very many indications of both Testaments taken together, the continuous conviction of the Jewish people, also the unbroken tradition of the Church in addition to the internal evidences drawn from the text itself, they justify affirming that these books were not written by Moses, but were composed for the most part from sources later than the time of Moses?
Reply: No.
In other words, the “JEDP” hypothesis in its most liberal form, which says that none of the texts of the Pentateuch were actually written by Moses, is rejected.
Question II. Whether the Mosaic authenticity of the Pentateuch neces-1998 sarily demands such a redaction of the whole work that it must be neld absolutely that Moses wrote all and each book with his own hand, or dictated them to copyists; or, whether also the hypothesis can be permitted of those who think that the work was conceived by him under the influence of divine inspiration, and was committed to another or several to be put into writing, but in such manner that they rendered his thought faithfully, wrote nothing contrary to his wish, omitted nothing; and, finally, when the work was composed in this way, approved by Moses as its chief and inspired author, it was published under his name.
Reply: No, for the first part; yes, for the second.
In other words, Moses needn’t have written it all himself, but could have had the help of older or contemporary sources - say, the histories in Genesis - but was the final editor, the chief author, and gave it his “imprimatur”.
Question Ill. Whether without prejudice to the Mosaic authenticity of the Pentateuch it can be granted that Moses for the composition of the work made use of sources, namely written documents or oral tradition, from which, according to the peculiar goal set before him, and under the influence of divine inspiration, he made some borrowings, and these, arranged word for word according to sense or amplified, he inserted into the work itself?
Reply: Yes.
In other words, there could have been documents, but these would all predate Moses, and he could have arranged them, explained them, or provided glosses.
Question IV. Whether, safeguarding substantially the Mosaic authenticity and the integrity of the Pentateuch, it can be admitted that in such a long course of ages it underwent some modifications, for example: additions made after the death of Moses, or by an inspired author, or glosses and explanations inserted in the texts, certain words and forms of the antiquated language translated into more modern language; finally false readings to be ascribed to the errors of copyists, which should be examined and passed upon according to the norms of textual criticism.
Reply: Yes, the judgment of the Church being maintained.
In other words, later additions - such as glosses, updating of outdated language, or inspired additions such as the account of Moses’ death - are considered possible.
, is that Pope Pius X intended the findings of the PBC to be infallible in his anti-modernist crusade, though whether or not he was actually speaking ex cathedra or whether or not he was completely definitive in his statements is a matter of debate.