De inspiratione sacrae Scripturae: theologica disquisitio

Proem. pag. 5

PART ONE

ON THE INSPIRATION OF SACRED SCRIPTURE

Introduction. 15

CHAPTER ONE. — Where the dogmatic notion of inspiration is declared.

§ 1. — That all and each of the books of Scripture are to be held as sacred and canonical, not by reason of the approval received from the infallible magisterium of the Church, nor even by reason of the sole matter, or revealed truth, contained in them without admixture of error, but altogether by reason of their origin, inasmuch as, written with the Holy Spirit inspiring, they have God as their author 18

§ 2. — That God is the author of the books of the new and the old Testament, not in an abusive sense, as having only inspired in the hagiographers the plan of writing, supplied the general argument of the book, and, while they wrote, stood by lest they err, but in the proper sense, as having dictated the books themselves with all their parts, by suggesting them to the sacred writers whom He used as instruments. Whence it follows that all and each of the things contained in the original books of Scripture, as and in the respect in which they lie proposed to the reader in those same books, are truly from God as the written word of God directly addressed to us 29

§ 3. — That it could be understood in two ways that Scripture was written with the Holy Spirit dictating. In one way indeed by material or verbal dictation. In the other way by a dictation of a far higher order, that is, by an interior motion or instinct to conceive mentally the sentences and propositions which God wished to direct to us through the hagiographers, and to commit them thus conceived to writing. And that the former mode of dictation is not necessary for God to be called the author of the books of Scripture, nor, generally speaking, is it in any way to be admitted. Whence the latter mode remains, as that in which the proper notion of inspiration is truly had, of which the Vatican Council says: The Church, however, holds those books as sacred and canonical because, written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, they have God as their author, and have been handed down as such to the Church herself 40

CHAPTER TWO. — Where the notion of inspiration is further elaborated.

§ 1. — That the receiving of knowledge of the things to be written is indeed among the prerequisites to inspiration, but is not yet formally included in it. And that this receiving takes place in two ways. Either through prophetic revelation according to one or another of the many modes which St. Thomas assigns, 2-2, Qq. 171-174, if the things are far removed from the writer's knowledge. Or through natural means with divine assistance, for instance through the hagiographer's own industry in seeking documents, consulting historical sources, and comparing all things that contribute to the acquisition of human knowledge, if it is otherwise. 45

§ 2. — That inspiration consists formally in a motion of the intellect and will, by which the sacred writer is moved divinely, first indeed to form within himself the context of the sentences which God, as principal author, wills to be written in the book, then to delineate by material writing whatever was first mentally composed by divine instinct or afflatus. And that a writing of this kind is truly the writing of God, even though it preserves the proper character of the human writer as regards the modality of the conceptions and the connected manner of style and literary art 51

§ 3. — Where certain conclusions flowing from the notion of inspiration thus far unfolded are explained. 56

First conclusion: That, taking revelation in the sense consecrated by ecclesiastical usage, as the positive speech of God to us, every inspiration of Scripture is revelation, but not conversely. And that some revelation precedes inspiration, some follows it, and some also is bound to it by no order at all ibid.

Second conclusion: That inspiration extends to the words as much as to the concepts. And that the vivisection which certain writers introduce proceeds from their false supposition that inspiration is to be understood after the manner of an infusion or immission of preformed concepts or words. But it no longer has any place, once inspiration has been taken as a motion by which the intellect of the hagiographer is instrumentally moved to compose the whole context in the concrete, and not with regard to abstract thoughts alone, but inseparably also with regard to the words that express them. 63

Third conclusion: That the sacred books are wholly from God and wholly from man, just as a work of art is wholly from the instrument and wholly from the artisan: inasmuch as, namely, there is no part distinct in reality from another part which is owed to the proper power of the instrument apart from the influx of the principal cause, or to the influx of the principal cause apart from the proper activity of the instrument, but there are only distinct formalities which must be referred to one or the other cause as to their proper principle. 63

Fourth conclusion: That it is false that the books of Scripture are as human as if they were not divine. False too that the hagiographers were neither more nor less the authors of the canonical books than profane writers are the authors of their own. False, finally, that the sense of those same books is no less proper to the biblical writer than the sense of the Iliad is to Homer, or that of the orations against Verres to Cicero. 64

Fifth conclusion: That for the notion of an inspired book it indeed makes no difference who the instrumental writer was. And that nonetheless it is most falsely inferred: therefore, generally speaking, questions about the persons of the biblical writers belong to higher criticism, as though circumscribed within its own and reserved field. 66

Confirmation of the preceding conclusion, from the solution of the question: Whether it can be said without grave error in the matter of faith that the Pentateuch was not written by Moses 65

PART TWO

ON THE THINGS THAT FOLLOW UPON INSPIRATION

INTRODUCTION 81

CHAPTER ONE. — On the spiritual sense of Sacred Scripture.

§ 1. — The quiddity and existence of the spiritual sense ibid.

§ 2. — Conclusions against the broad school of biblical scholars 90

CHAPTER TWO. — On the intention of Scripture, terminated of itself upon matters of faith and morals.

§ 1. — What is to be understood by the name of matters of faith and morals pertaining to the edification of Christian doctrine 94

§ 2. The most grievous error of biblical scholars in this matter 100

CHAPTER THREE. — On the inerrancy of Sacred Scripture.

State of the Question 111

§ 1. — The reasons of those who have admitted errors in the Bible 114

§ 2. — Confutation 127

§ 3. — The Encyclical Providentissimus Deus 131

CHAPTER FOUR. — On the literary forms of Sacred Scripture.

State of the Question 133

§ 1. — An ingenious invention for reconciling the inerrancy of Scripture with the material falsity of its assertions. 135

§ 2. — Confutation of the system, first as regards its general principles 143

Secondly as regards myths 146

Thirdly as regards implicit citations, (where the recent decision of the Biblical Commission is treated) 148

Fourthly as regards artificial accommodations of history. 153

CHAPTER FIVE. — On the interpretation of Sacred Scripture.

§ 1. — On the legitimate sense of the Tridentine decree concerning the use and interpretation of the sacred books 157

§ 2. — On the things that follow from this decree. 168

§ 3. — Epilogue 172