conspicuously. By her admirable laws and regulations she has always
shown herself solicitous that the celestial treasure of the Sacred
Books, so bountifully bestowed upon man by the Holy Spirit, should not
lie neglected. She has arranged that a considerable portion of them
should be read, and with pious mind considered by all her ministers in
the daily office of the sacred psalmody. She has ordered that in
cathedral churches, in monasteries, and in convents of other regulars,
which are places most fit for study, they shall be expounded and
interpreted by capable men. She has strictly commanded that her
children shall be fed with the saving word of the Gospel at least on
Sundays and on solemn feasts. Moreover, it is owing to the wisdom and
the diligence of the Church that there has always been, continued from
century to century, that cultivation of Sacred Scripture which has been
so remarkable and which has borne such ample fruit.
And here, in order to strengthen Our teaching and Our exhortations, it
is well to recall how, from the first beginnings of the Christian
religion, so many who have been renowned for holiness of life and for
sacred learning have given their deep and most constant attention to
Holy Scripture. If we consider the immediate disciples of the
Apostles, St. Clement of Rome, St. Ignatius of Antioch, and St.
Polycarp--or the Apologists, such as St. Justin and St. Irenaeus, we
find that in their letters and in their books, whether in defence of
the Catholic faith or in commendation of it, they draw faith and
strength and unction mainly from the word of God. When there arose, in
various Episcopal Sees, catechetical and theological schools, of which
the most celebrated were those of Alexandria and of Antioch, there was
little taught in those schools but what consisted in the reading, the
unfolding, and the defence of the divine written word. From these
schools came forth numbers of Fathers and of writers whose laborious
studies and admirable writings have justly merited for the three
following centuries the appellation of the golden age of biblical
exegesis.
In the Eastern Church, the greatest name of all is Origen. He was a
man remarkable alike for quickness of genius and for persevering labor.
From his numerous writings and his immense work of the _Hexapla_ almost
all who came after him have drawn. Others who have widened the field
of this science may also be named. Among the more excellent,
Alexandria could boast of Clement and Cyril; Palestine, of Eusebius and
the other Cyril; Cappadocia, of Basil the Great and the two Gregories,
Nazianzen and Nyssene; and Antioch, of St. John Chrysostom, in whom
skill in this learning was rivalled by the splendor of his eloquence.
In the Western Church there were many names as great: Tertullian,
Cyprian, Hilary, Ambrose, Leo the Great, Gregory the Great; most famous
of all, Augustine and Jerome. Of these two the former was marvellously
acute in penetrating the sense of God's word, and most fertile in the
use that he made of it for the promotion of Catholic truth. The latter
has received from the Church, by reason of his pre-eminent knowledge of
Scripture and the greatness of his labors in promoting its use, the
name of the "Great Doctor."
From this period, down to the eleventh century, although biblical
studies did not flourish with the same vigor and with the same
fruitfulness as before, they nevertheless did flourish, and that
principally through the instrumentality of the clergy. It was their
care and solicitude that selected the most fruitful of the things which
the ancients had left behind them, placed these in digested order, and
published them with additions of their own--as did Isidore of Seville,
Venerable Bede, and Alcuin, among the most prominent. It was they who
illustrated the sacred pages with "glosses," or short commentaries, as
we see in Walafrid Strabo and Anselm of Laon, or who expended fresh
labor in securing their integrity, as did Peter Damian and Lanfranc.
In the twelfth century many took up with great success the allegorical
exposition of Scripture. In this Bernard is easily pre-eminent. His
writings, it may be said, are Scripture all through. With the age of
the scholastics there came fresh and fruitful progress in the study of
the Bible. That the scholastics were solicitous about the genuineness
of the Latin version is evident from the _Correctoria Biblica_, or list
of emendations, which they have left behind them. They expended,
however, more of their study and of their industry on interpretation
and on explanation. To them we owe the accurate and clear distinction,
such as had not been given before, of the various senses of the sacred
words; the weight of each word in the balance of theology; the division
of books into parts, and the summaries of the various parts; the
investigation of the purpose of the writers, and the unfolding of the
necessary connection of one sentence with another. No man can fail to
see the amount of light which was thus shed on the more obscure
passages. The abundance of their Scriptural learning is to be seen
both in their theological treatises and in their commentaries. In this
Thomas of Aquin bears the palm.
When Our predecessor, Clement V., established chairs of Oriental
literature in the Athenaeum at Rome, and in the principal Universities
of Europe, our students began to labor more minutely on the original
text of the Bible, as well as on the Latin version. The revival
amongst us of Greek learning, and, much more, the happy invention of
the art of printing, gave the strongest impetus to the study of Holy
Scripture. In a brief space of time innumerable editions, especially
of the Vulgate, poured from the press, and were spread throughout the
Catholic world; so honored and loved were the divine volumes during
that very period against which the enemies of the Church direct their
calumnies.
Nor must we forget how many learned men there were, chiefly among the
religious orders, who did excellent work for the Bible between the
dates of the Councils of Vienne and Trent. These men, by employment of
modern means and appliances, and by contribution of their own genius
and learning, not only added to the rich stores of ancient times, but
prepared the way for the pre-eminence of the succeeding century--the
century which followed the Council of Trent. It then seemed almost as
if the great age of the Fathers had returned. It is well known, and We
recall it with pleasure, that Our predecessors from Pius IV. to Clement
VIII. caused to be prepared the celebrated editions of the Vulgate and
the Septuagint, which, having been published by the command and
authority of Sixtus V. and of the same Clement, are now in common use.
At this time, moreover, were carefully brought out various other
ancient versions of the Bible, and the Polyglots of Antwerp and of
Paris, most important for the investigation of the true meaning of the
text. There is not any one Book of either Testament which did not find
more than one expositor, nor is there any grave question which did not
profitably exercise the ability of many inquirers. Among these there
are not a few--more especially of those who made most study of the
Fathers--who have made for themselves names of renown. From that time
forward the labor and solicitude of our students have never been
wanting. As time has gone on, eminent scholars have carried on
biblical study with success. They have defended Holy Scripture against
the cavils of _rationalism_ with the same weapons of philology and
kindred sciences with which it had been attacked. The calm and fair
consideration of what has been said will clearly show that the Church
has never failed in any manner of provision for bringing the fountains
of the Divine Scripture in a wholesome way within reach of her
children, and that she has ever held fast and exercised the
guardianship divinely bestowed upon her for its protection and glory.
She has never, therefore, required, nor does she now require, any
stimulation from without.
We must now, Venerable Brethren, as Our purpose demands, impart to you
such counsels as seem best suited for carrying on successfully the
study of biblical science. We must, in the first place, have a clear
idea of the kind of men whom we have to oppose, their tactics and their
weapons.
In earlier times the contest was chiefly with those who, relying on
private judgment and repudiating the divine tradition and the teaching
authority of the Church, held the Scriptures to be the one and only
source of revelation and the final appeal in matters of Faith. Now, we
have to meet the Rationalists, the true children and heirs of the older
heretics. Trusting in their turn to their own judgment, they have
rejected even the scraps and remnants of Christian belief handed down
to them from their fathers. They deny that there is any such thing as
divine revelation, or inspiration, or Holy Scripture at all. They see
in these histories only forgeries and falsehoods of men. They set down
the Scripture narratives as stupid fables or lying tales. The
prophecies and the oracles of God are to them either predictions made
up after the event, or forecasts formed by the light of nature. The
miracles and manifestations of God's power are not what they profess to
be, but are either startling effects which are not beyond the forces of
nature, or else mere tricks and myths. The Gospels and apostolic
writings are not, they say, the work of the authors to whom they are
assigned. These detestable errors, whereby they think to destroy the
truth of the divine Books, are obtruded on the world as the peremptory
pronouncements of a newly-invented "free science." This science,
however, is so far from final that they are perpetually modifying and
supplementing it. There are some of them who, notwithstanding their
impious opinions and utterances about God and His Christ, the Gospels,
and the rest of Holy Scripture, would fain be regarded as being
theologians and Christians and men of the Gospel. They attempt to
disguise under such names of honor their rashness and their insolence.
To them we must add not a few professors of other sciences who approve
and sustain their views, and are egged on to attack the Bible by
intolerance of revelation. It is deplorable to see this warfare
becoming from day to day more widespread and more ruthless. It is
sometimes men of learning and judgment who are assailed; but these have
little difficulty in standing on their guard. The efforts and the arts
of the enemy are chiefly directed against the more ignorant masses of
the people. These men diffuse their deadly poison by means of books
and pamphlets and newspapers. They spread it by means of addresses and
of conversations. They are found everywhere. They are in possession
of numerous schools for the young, wrested from the guardianship of the
Church. In those schools, by means of ridicule and scurrilous jesting,
they pervert the credulous and unformed minds of the young to contempt
of Scripture. Should not these things, Venerable Brethren, stir up and
set on fire the heart of every Pastor, so that to this "knowledge,
falsely so called," may be opposed the ancient and true science which
the Church, through the Apostles, has received from Christ, and that
the Sacred Scriptures may find champions that are strong for so great a
struggle?
Let our first care, then, be to see that in Seminaries and Academical
foundations the study of Holy Scripture is placed on such a footing as
both the importance of it and the circumstances of the time demand.
With this view, that which is of first importance is a wise selection
of professors. Teachers of Sacred Scripture are not to be appointed at
hap-hazard out of the crowd. They must be men whose character and
fitness have been proved by great love of, and long familiarity with,
the Bible, and by the learning and study which befits their office.
It is of equal importance to provide in due time for a continuous
succession of such teachers. It will be well, wherever this can be
done, to select young men of promise, who have studied their theology
with distinction, and to set them apart exclusively for Holy Scripture,
affording them time and facilities for still fuller study. Professors
thus chosen and appointed may enter with confidence on the task that is
set before them. That they may be at their best, and bear all the
fruit that is possible, there are some other hints which We may
somewhat more fully set before them.
At the commencement of a course of Holy Scripture, let the professor
strive earnestly to form the judgment of the young beginners, so as to
train them equally to defend the sacred writings and to penetrate their
meaning. This is the object of the treatise which is called
"Introduction to the Bible." Here the student is taught how to prove
its integrity and authority, how to investigate and ascertain its true
sense, and how to meet and refute all captious objections. It is
needless to insist on the importance of making these preliminary
studies in an orderly and thorough way, in the company and with the aid
of Theology. The whole of the subsequent course will rest on the
foundation thus laid, and will be luminous with the light which has
been thus acquired.
Next, the teacher will turn his earnest attention to that most fruitful
branch of Scripture science which has to do with interpretation.
Therein is imparted the method of using the word of God for the
promotion of religion and of piety. We are well aware that neither the
extent of the matter nor the time at disposal allows every single Book
of the Bible to be separately studied in the schools. The teaching,
however, should result in a definite and ascertained method of
interpretation. Hence the professor should at once avoid giving a mere
taste of every Book, and the equal mistake of dwelling at too great
length on merely a part of some one Book. If most schools cannot do
what is done in the larger institutions--that is, take the students
through the whole of one or two Books continuously, and with some
considerable development--yet at least those parts which are selected
for interpretation should be treated with some fulness. In this way
the students may be attracted, and learn from the sample that is set
before them to love and read the rest in the course of their after
lives. The professor, following the tradition of antiquity, will use
the Vulgate as his text. The Council of Trent has decreed that "in
public lectures, disputations, preaching, and exposition," the Vulgate
is the "authentic" version; and this is the existing custom of the
Church. At the same time, the other versions which Christian antiquity
has approved and used should not be neglected, more especially the more
ancient MSS. Although the meaning of the Hebrew and the Greek is
substantially rendered by the Vulgate, nevertheless, wherever there may
be ambiguity or want of clearness, the "examination of older tongues,"
to quote St. Augustine, will be of service. In this matter we need
hardly say that the greatest prudence is required, for the "office of a
commentator," as St. Jerome says, "is to set forth not that which he
himself would prefer, but that which his author says." The question of
"readings" having been, when necessary, carefully discussed, the next
thing is to investigate and expound the meaning. The first counsel to
be here given is this: that the more our adversaries strive in the
contrary direction, so much the more solicitously should we adhere to
the received and approved canons of interpretation. Hence, while
weighing the meanings of words, the connection of ideas, the
parallelism of passages, and the like, we should by all means make use
of external illustrations drawn from other cognate learning. This
should, however, be done with caution, so as not to bestow on such
questions more labor and time than that which is spent on the Sacred
Books themselves, and not to overload the minds of the students with a
mass of information which will be rather a hindrance than a help.
The professor may now safely pass on to the use of Scripture in matters
of Theology. Here it must be observed that, in addition to the usual
reasons which make ancient writings more or less difficult to
understand, there are some which are peculiar to the Sacred Books. The
language of the Bible is employed to express, under the inspiration of
the Holy Ghost, many things which are beyond the powers and scope of
human reason--that is to say, divine mysteries and many matters which
are related to them. There is sometimes in such passages a fuller and
a deeper meaning than the letter seems to express or than the laws of
hermeneutics indicate. Moreover, the literal sense itself frequently
admits other senses, which either illustrate dogma or commend morality.
It must therefore be recognized that the sacred writings are wrapt in a
certain religious obscurity, and that no one can enter into them
without a guide. God has so disposed it that, as the Holy Fathers
teach, men may investigate the Scriptures with greater ardor and
earnestness, and that what is attained with difficulty may sink more
deeply into the mind and heart. From this also, and mainly, men may
understand that God has delivered the Scriptures to the Church, and
that in reading and treating of His utterances they must follow the
Church as their guide and teacher. St. Irenaeus long since laid it down
that where the _Charismata_ of God were placed, there the truth was to
be learnt, and that Scripture is expounded without peril, by those with
whom there is apostolic succession. His teaching, and that of other
Fathers, is embraced by the Council of the Vatican which, in renewing
the decree of Trent, declares its mind to be this--that "in matters of
faith and morals, which belong to the building up of Christian
doctrine, that sense is to be considered the true sense of the Sacred
Scripture which has been held and is held by our Holy Mother the
Church, whose place it is to judge of the true sense and interpretation
of the Scriptures; and therefore that it is permitted to no one to
interpret the Sacred Scripture contrary to this sense, or contrary to
the unanimous consent of the Fathers." By this law, most full of
wisdom, the Church by no means prevents or restrains the pursuit of
biblical science. She, on the contrary, provides for its freedom from
error, and greatly advances its real progress. A wide field lies open
to any teacher, in which his hermeneutical skill may exercise itself
with signal effect and for the welfare of the Church. On the one hand,
in those passages of Scripture which have not as yet received a certain
and definitive interpretation, such labors may, in the sweetly ordered
providence of God, serve as a preparation for bringing to maturity the
judgment of the Church. In passages already defined, a private doctor
may do work equally valuable, either by setting them forth more clearly
to the commonalty of the faithful, or more learnedly before the
learned, or by defending them more powerfully from adversaries.
Wherefore the first and most sacred object of the Catholic commentator
should be to interpret those passages which have received an authentic
interpretation--either from the sacred writers themselves, under the
inspiration of the Holy Ghost (as in many places of the New Testament),
or from the Church, under the assistance of the same Holy Spirit,
whether by her solemn judgment or by her ordinary and universal
authoritative teaching--in that identical sense, and to prove, by all
the resources of learning, that sound hermeneutical laws admit of no
other than that interpretation. In the other passages the analogy of
faith should be followed, and the Catholic doctrine, as authoritatively
proposed by the Church, should be held as the supreme rule. Since the
same God is the author both of the Sacred Books and of the doctrine
committed to the Church, it is clearly impossible that any teaching can
by legitimate interpretation be extracted from the former which shall
in any respect be at variance with the latter. Hence it follows that
all interpretation is unfounded and false which either makes the sacred
writers disagree one with another, or is opposed to the doctrine of the
Church.
The professor of Holy Scripture, therefore, amongst other
recommendations, must be well versed in the whole of Theology, and
deeply read in the commentaries of the Holy Fathers and Doctors, and
the best of other interpreters. This is inculcated by St. Jerome, and
still more by St. Augustine, who thus justly complains: "If there is no
branch of teaching, however humble and easy to learn, which does not
require a master, what can be a greater sign of rashness and pride than
to refuse to study the Books of the divine mysteries by the help of
those who have interpreted them?" Other Fathers have said the same,
and have confirmed it by their example. They endeavored to acquire
understanding of the Holy Scriptures, not by their own lights and
ideas, but from the writings and authority of the ancients, who in
their turn, as we know, received the rule of interpretation in direct
line from the Apostles.
The Holy Fathers, to whom, after the Apostles, the Church owes its
growth--who planted, watered, built, fed, and nourished it--are of
supreme authority whenever they all interpret in one and the same
manner any text of the Bible as pertaining to doctrine of faith or
morals. Their unanimity clearly evinces that such interpretation has
come down from the Apostles as a matter of Catholic faith. The opinion
of the Fathers is also of very great weight when they treat of these
matters in their capacity of private teachers; not only because they
excelled in knowledge of revealed doctrine and in acquaintance with
many things useful for the understanding of the apostolic Books, but
also because they were men of eminent sanctity and of ardent zeal for
the truth, on whom God bestowed a more ample measure of His light. The
commentator, therefore, should make it his care to follow in their
footsteps with reverence, and to avail himself of their labors with
intelligent appreciation.
He must not, however, on that account consider that it is forbidden,
when just cause exists, to push inquiry and exposition beyond what the
Fathers have done--provided he religiously observes the rule so wisely
laid down by St. Augustine: not to depart from the literal and obvious
sense, except where reason makes that sense untenable or necessity
requires. This is a rule to which it is the more necessary to adhere
strictly in these times, when the thirst for novelty and unrestrained
license of thought make the danger of error most real and proximate.
Neither should those passages be neglected which the Fathers have
understood in an allegorical or figurative sense, more especially when
such interpretation is justified by the literal sense, and when it
rests on the authority of many. This method of interpretation has been
received by the Church from the Apostles, and has been approved by her
own practice, as her liturgy attests. The Holy Fathers did not thereby
pretend directly to demonstrate dogmas of faith, but used it as a means
of promoting virtue and piety, such as, by their own experience, they
knew to be most valuable.