Tractatus de divina traditione et Scriptura

From the divine Tradition of the Old Testament, and from the doctrine of Christ Himself and of the Apostles, all the books and the parts of the books pertaining to Holy Scripture must be believed of divine authority in equal manner.

« It is certainly established, 1°, that at the time of Christ and the Apostles there existed with the Synagogue a collection of books in which the whole Jewish people was persuaded that only divine books received from the forefathers were contained; and it is likewise established, 2°, that Christ the Lord Himself and the Apostles of Christ confirmed this faith of the Jews, and commended to the Church the books comprehended in the collection under the name of Scripture, Holy Scripture, Sacred Letters as divine. »

We inquire concerning the specific name and signification, and also concerning the reality, of Holy Scripture. And we propose three things to be demonstrated in this thesis: a) that this name of Scripture among the people of God both before Christ and at the time of Christ and the Apostles, and in the mouth of Christ Himself and of the Apostles, was the proper name of one collection of books, signifying a sacred authority inhering in the writings alone and in all the writings comprehended under this name of Scripture; b) that this authority signified by the name of Holy Scripture was believed by the Jews to inhere in the books as wholly divine, as the word of God Himself; c) that Christ Himself and His Apostles supposed and taught this very divine authority of Scripture as the word of God.

I. It is of the highest moment in the present case that the signification of the name Scripture among the people of God and in the mouth of Christ and the Apostles, proper to one sole and whole collection of sacred books, be well understood. For if these two things are certain — that by the people of God, by Christ Himself and the Apostles of Christ, all and only the writings of one sacred collection were understood under the name of Scripture, and that by that very name a sacred authority was signified — then indeed it will be established from the very revelation given and confirmed by Christ and by the Apostles that this sacred authority, signified by the name of Scripture, inheres in all and only the writings demonstrated to pertain to that collection of Scripture.

But from these things themselves it is clear that, when we speak of the unity of a collection of books, the form of unity, i.e. the formal rationale under which all those books are understood to constitute one thing, is that one authority, equal in all. What is therefore to be proved by us first of all is this unity of a collection of books signified by the proper name of Scripture.

1°. As regards the existence of some most ancient collection of sacred books as in one body of religious law, it suffices to have noted the following.

a) That some of the books which from remotest antiquity have been designated by all Christians under the name of the Scriptures of the Old Testament existed with the Jews long before Christ — indeed from the very first origin of the books — in some one collection publicly received, is manifest from the very scope of the books, which shines forth from their internal character, so long as there is no question of the amplitude of the collection or of the number of books comprehended in it, all and only. For at least several of those books are so constituted that they manifestly form as it were one body destined for public use in the whole religious and civil life of that people. Cf. Exod. XVII. 14; XXIV. 4; Deut. IV. 1–15; XVII. 18. 19; XXVIII. 58–61; XXIX. 20; XXX. 10; XXXI. 9–13. 26. ¹

1. Kings X. 25; 3. Kings II. 3; 4. Kings XXII. 8. 10. ff.; Dan. IX. 2; 2. Esdras VII. 8; 1. Mach. I. 59. 60; 2. Mach. II. 13; Luke IV. 16. ff.; Acts XIII. 15. 27; XV. 21; 2. Cor. III. 14.

b) Mention together with the partition of one whole collection occurs in the prologue to the book of Ecclesiasticus, written in the third century before Christ². The partition is there commemorated three times as the Law, the Prophets, and the other books « handed down to us by our forefathers. » At the same time it is indicated fairly clearly (especially in the Greek text) that that whole collection — « the Law, the Prophets, and the rest of the other books » — existed at that time not only in Hebrew but already also in the Greek version³. Most similar is the distribution of the collection at the time of Christ into the Law, the Prophets, and the Psalms, Matt. XXII. 40; Luke XXIV. 27. 44.

Likewise with Philo the Jew (On the Contemplative Life, Frankfurt ed. 1691, p. 893) the division is into the laws, the discourses divinely uttered through the prophets, and the hymns. More distinctly Josephus, Against Apion, bk. I, n. 8, enumerates the books themselves according to the same distribution. I append the passage entire, because it will help often in what follows to have kept the whole context before our eyes. « With us, he says, there is by no means an innumerable multitude of books disagreeing and conflicting with each other; but there are only two and twenty books containing the description of all time, which are deservedly believed divine. Of these, five are of Moses, which contain both the laws and the tradition of the generation of mankind down to his (Moses') own death...... From the death of Moses down to the reign of Artaxerxes king of the Persians after Xerxes, the prophets who succeeded Moses wrote down the deeds of their own age in thirteen books; but the remaining four contain hymns to God and precepts of human life. From Artaxerxes down to our own memory the several things have indeed been committed to writing, but the books have not been held in equal authority with the preceding ones, because the succession of the prophets was not accurately ascertained (δια το μη γενεσθαι την των προφητων ἀκριβῆ διαδοχην.) But in fact it is manifest with what veneration we prosecute our books. For though so many ages have now flowed by, no one has dared either to add anything to them or to take away from them or to change them. But it is inborn in all Jews straightway from birth to believe these writings the dogmas of God and to inhere in them and for them, if need be, gladly to undergo death. » With this distribution of the books pertaining to one collection agrees also that observed in the Talmud and among the Massoretes and still now in the Hebrew Bibles, into the Law, the Prophets, and the Hagiographa תּוֹרָה נְבִיאִיִם כְּתוּבִיִם. 2°. The unity of the collection as a sacred library set apart from all other less sacred books can already be understood from what has been said. But what must be demonstrated singly is that in which the hinge of the present question turns: that the form of unity was constituted by the people of God, by Christ the Lord Himself and His Apostles, in one equal sacred authority of all the parts of that collection, and that the formal rationale of sacred authority was expressed by the name of Scripture as proper to all and only the writings of that sacred library, so that to whatever document the name of Scripture or its twin is attributed, by this very fact it is designated as part of that one collection and as eminent in the sacred authority inhering in this whole and sole body of Scripture.

a) In the New Testament, by Christ and the Apostles, the books of the three classes (of the Law, the Prophets, the Psalms) of which we spoke, and the several texts of the books, are designated by the collective name of Scripture, Holy Scripture, and by the formula of citation it is written or another equipollent one, in such a way that it appears that this is the proper name of some one most well-known collection of books, and that it is a name of excellence by which an authority exempt and equal for all those books and texts of books is signified, so that the appellation itself is of itself held as a certain pledge and ineluctable demonstration of truth.

α) By Christ the Lord and the Apostles, under the name of Scripture or Holy Scripture as an authority which every faithful intellect serves, books from the several classes are cited more than thirty times — now from the first, now from the second, now from the third class — and by the same appellation of excellence appeal is made to the sacred books in general and without distinction about ten times. Likewise under the equipollent formula it is written appeal is made indiscriminately to books of diverse classes nearly ninety times. β) In the New Testament texts from diverse classes are adduced together as if from one and the same book under the common formula Scripture says. « Does not Scripture say: because from the seed of David (Ps. LXXXVIII. 5; CXXXI. 11), and from the town of Bethlehem (Mich. V. 2) comes Christ? » John VII. 42. « Scripture contains: behold I lay in Sion a chief cornerstone, elect, precious; and he that believes in him shall not be confounded (Is. XXVIII. 16.)... the stone which the builders rejected, the same is made the head of the corner (Ps. CXVII. 22), and a stone of stumbling and a rock of scandal » (Is. VIII. 14.) 1. Pet. II. 6–8. Texts from diverse books are adduced under the formula « one Scripture, another Scripture, » as in John XIX. 36. 37. Under the formula it is written in the Law places from books of diverse classes are cited⁴, and thus by the name of the Law, proper to one class, the whole collection is designated: John X. 34; XII. 34; XV. 25; Rom. III. 19; 1. Cor. XIV. 21. Moreover γ) all three classes are expressly numbered together under the one common name of the Scriptures, Luke XXIV. 44. 45. cf. 27. and 32. Finally δ) St Paul, 2. Tim. III. 15. 16, first calls the whole collection sacred letters (τα ιερα γραμματα with the article), then designates distributively each book of that collection as Scripture, and by this very fact as eminent in authority from divine inspiration, which is the property signified by the very name of Scripture. Of inspiration and of this text we shall speak more fully afterwards; meanwhile it is established that the name of Scripture is a proper name designating an exempt collection of books, eminent in authority, as one whole, in which the comprehended books, all of them, and the several texts of the books, are Scripture; and because they are parts or several sayings of Scripture, therefore to them all is asserted one and the same authority designated by the name of Scripture.

There existed therefore at the time of Christ and the Apostles one collection of sacred books, whose formal rationale of unity is drawn from nowhere else than from one authority in the whole and in all the parts; and this very inherent sacred authority the name Scripture in the mouth of Christ and the Apostles signifies.

b) Since Christ the Lord and the Apostles supposed and confirmed the faith of the Jews concerning the sacred Scriptures as true, we can, for understanding more distinctly the evangelical and apostolic doctrine itself, inquire what the Jews thought and believed concerning the unity and authority of Holy Scripture at the time when Christ and the Apostles held and approved their faith in this chapter as ratified; for this very faith will be the faith confirmed and handed down to the Church by Christ Himself and the Apostles. We shall take the exposition of that persuasion of the Jews, of the Hellenists from Philo and of the Palestinians from Josephus.

Philo, in the continuous and most ample use of the sacred books found in his works, appeals indiscriminately, whether to all or to single ones, as to the holy Scriptures, holy books, the sacred discourse, the most sacred letter, the prophetic discourse, prophetic sayings, the oracle, things uttered in holier wise, the oracle of God ἱερας γραφας, ἱερας βιβλους, ἱερον λογον, ἱερωτατον γραμμα, προφητικον λογον, προφητικα ῥηματα, χρησμον, το χρησθεν, τα ἱεροφαντησθεντα, λογιον του θεου (Eichhorn, Repertorium, vol. V, pp. 241–246). In the same way Josephus calls the sacred books those books of the holy Scriptures, the sacred letters ἱερας βιβλους, τας των ἱερων γραφων βιβλους, ἱερα γραμματα (Antiquities, preface, p. 5; bk. III, ch. 5, n. 2; bk. IV, ch. 8, n. 48; bk. X, ch. 4, n. 2; Against Apion, bk. II, n. 4, Haverkamp ed.). Similarly (as we saw done in the N. T.) what is in the books of Moses and in the books of Kings he comprehends under the common formula « that thus it is written in the holy books » Antiq. IX. ch. 2. n. 2. He vindicates the authority of the book of Joshua because it is « among the books kept in the temple » Antiq. V. ch. 1. n. 17; the authority of the book of Daniel because it is « in the holy Scriptures » Antiq. X. ch. 10. n. 3. But manifestly Philo and Josephus express nothing other than the common faith of the Jewish people; and therefore, from the doctrine of the Synagogue confirmed by Christ and the Apostles, there is no doubt concerning the unity of the collection, inasmuch as the authority of all the books comprehended under the name of Scripture is equal and exempt. What therefore is said and proved concerning the authority of Scripture universally, or concerning the several books of Scripture, demonstrates the authority of the whole collection and of all the books and all the parts pertaining to Scripture.

II. We have spoken of the unity of the Scriptures, and of the sacred authority inherent in them as the form of unity; but what and how great this authority signified by the very names Scripture, Holy Scripture, Sacred Letters is, has not yet been explained. We shall complete the declaration of this matter gradually in the theses that follow. Now we say that in the faith of the Jewish people, which Christ the Lord and the Apostles confirmed, there was believed, as a fundamental dogma, an authority of Scripture that is wholly divine.

We shall inquire into this faith of the Synagogue again from Josephus and Philo; for among the Jews of that age no more certain witnesses survive to us. The former, a Palestinian of priestly race, the latter a Hellenist Jew, evidently speak everywhere in such a way as to be understood to set forth concerning this chapter not their private opinion but the notorious and public faith of the whole people.

The very perpetual appellations of Holy Scripture, of the holy books, of the books of Scripture, and others which we commemorated just above, and the manner of appealing to those Scriptures as to a divine body of law, already sufficiently demonstrate that the books were held to be of altogether divine authority. Yet the proper force and signification with which they constantly designate those books by these names of excellence can be further determined by express testimonies.

a) The testimony of Josephus, whose words we cited above from bk. I, n. 8, Against Apion, is reduced to these points. a) Those books, he says — didactic and historical no less than prophetic — are believed and deservedly believed by his people, and not by himself alone, to be divine (τα δικαιως θεια πεπιστευμενα); it is as it were inborn in all Jews to believe these books and the doctrine of these books to be divine dogmas, so that for this faith they meet death with ready mind. b) This divinity is derived from the fact that all those books were written by prophets from divine inspiration, nor could there be room in that collection for any but prophetic books. After he said, ll. cc., Against Apion, nn. 6. 7, that among the Israelites the office of writing the history of the people belonged to « priests and prophets » alone, while the priestly race was always kept unmixed, he concludes: « nor was it lawful for all to write, nor is there any discrepancy in the writings; but to the prophets alone⁵, who indeed learned the most ancient and oldest things from divine inspiration (κατα την επιπνοιαν την απο του θεου), while they clearly described the things of their own time » (cf. Aug., City of God, XVIII, ch. 41). Whence γ) it is nefarious to add anything in those books, or to take away or to change. δ) This faith and veneration towards the divine books the Jews preserve insofar as the succession of the prophets — who both wrote the books and handed them down to the whole people — is manifest and ascertained.

b) Philo both demonstrates his nation's faith concerning their divinity by the mode, almost always mystical, in which he uses the Scriptures, and also expressly and frequently teaches that those books were written by prophets, « by whose mouth the father of all uttered oracles » (On Fugitives, p. 479); « who in the person of God uttered oracles, inspired » (On the Cherubim, p. 116); « who spoke, inspired by the deity » (On the Confusion of Tongues, p. 326). And all these things are referred not only to discourses uttered by mouth but to the writings themselves; whence he calls these writings « excellent oracles uttered by prophetic mouth » (On the Change of Names, p. 1066). A notable passage of Philo for the present matter is bk. III, On the Life of Moses, pp. 658, 659, where he calls the books rendered by the LXX interpreters into the Greek tongue « laws received from oracles, in which (in instituting a version) it would be nefarious to take away or add or transpose anything. » Hence he says it was necessary that the LXX interpreters in rendering those books should themselves also have prophesied: « as if seized by the deity they prophesied, not divers things diversely, but all the same names and words, as though some invisible one dictated to each »⁶. Philo has the history of the version from Aristeas (see in Gallandi's Bibliotheca, vol. II); but if that report concerning the manner of translating be not true, it could have had its origin from nowhere else than from the common faith of the whole people concerning the divinity of the written word in those books. Lest the version be esteemed of lesser dignity and authority than the Hebrew text, it seemed necessary to the Hellenists to suppose that the interpreters no less than the first writers had written by prophesying. Namely, just as the original text was by the common faith of the people of God believed to be prophecy, so the version either was, or was supposed by the Hellenists to be, prophetic in the generic signification of the word of which we spoke. Even if therefore the truth of the report concerning the inspiration of the interpreters can be denied, the testimony of the common faith of the people of God is adduced by a good many Fathers from the divinity of the Holy Scriptures: Justin, Exhortation to the Greeks, n. 13; Irenaeus III, ch. 21, al. 25; Clement of Alex., Stromata I, p. 342; Hilary, on the Psalms, preface, n. 8; Cyril of Jerusalem, Catecheses IV, n. 34; Epiphanius, On Measures and Weights, ch. 6; Augustine, City of God XVIII, chs. 42, 43; Theodoret, on the Psalms, preface, vol. I, p. 396; Olympiodorus, Catena on Job, proem, Junius–Patrizio ed.; Paschal Chronicle, Paris ed., p. 172; George Syncellus, Chronography, Venice ed., pp. 216, 217.

« Nor is it strange, says Clement of Alex., ll. cc., that by the inspiration of the God who gave prophecy, the version too was effected as a Greek prophecy. » But Augustine there, ch. 42, after expounding the inspiration of the interpreters: « They had received, he says, so marvellous a gift of God that in that manner also the authority of those Scriptures — not as human but, as they were, as divine — was commended to the nations that would one day believe. » In the following chapter, 43, he declares with how easy business the discrepancy between the Greek and the Hebrew text can be reconciled. « Whatever is in the Hebrew codices and is not with the Seventy interpreters, the Spirit of God willed not to say through the latter but through the former prophets. But whatever is with the Seventy and is not in the Hebrew codices, the same Spirit willed to say through the latter rather than through the former, thus showing that both were prophets. » Whoever would wish to defend this opinion can call to their aid, besides the sentence of the Fathers, that a) about this time — from the first Ptolemies down to the later Maccabean times (under John Hyrcanus I or his sons; cf. 2. Mach. I. 10) — there were several inspired to write books, as Jesus Sirach, the writer of the book of Wisdom, the writers of the first and second books of Maccabees and of several Psalms; and that b) it is certain that the Greek edition was employed, and not rarely its readings diverse from the Hebrew text were adopted, by the Apostles themselves, and that by them the sacred books in that edition and with many readings diverse from the Hebrew were handed down to the Churches as inspired Scriptures. As regards the inspiration of the first writing itself of the books, from which that report has its origin, it remains whole and indubitable.

We do not yet inquire in this place concerning the specific notion of inspiration; meanwhile, however, from what has been said it is evident that the Jews at the time of Christ and the Apostles believed by common faith that Holy Scripture, and consequently all the books comprehended in it and the parts of the books (cf. n. I), were documents written under the supernatural operation of God in such a way that they infallibly contain the word of God, and are documents not human but divine, by believing which the believer believes God Himself.

III. This faith concerning the dignity and authority of Scripture among the Jewish people, which ruled and sustained its whole religious, political, and domestic life (cf. 1. Mach. XII. 9), Christ the Lord Himself and His Apostles not only do not disapprove or correct; but whereas on the one hand they suppose it to be thus believed and held by the Jews in their very use of the Scriptures, or expressly testify to it (John V. 39), on the other hand they themselves confirm the same faith, and connect their whole institution with it.

1°. Christ Himself confirms it when He appeals to those same Scriptures as to a testimony not human but divine, and of supreme and infallible authority, against the incredulous Jews. « But I receive not testimony from man... But I have a greater testimony than John. » This greater testimony He adduces threefold: the works which the Father gave Him to perfect, the voice of the Father, the Scriptures. This third testimony He declares at length. « Search the Scriptures, for you think in them to have life everlasting; and the same are they that give testimony of me... But if you believe not his (Moses') writings, how will you believe my words? » John V. 34–47. See John X. 34. 35; Matt. XXI. 42. 43; XXII. 29. 31, etc. He uses the same Scriptures as instruments of irrefragable authority for instructing faithful disciples; He inculcates the necessity that the Scriptures be fulfilled: Matt. XXIV. 15; XXVI. 24. 31. 54; Luke IV. 21; XVI. 29. 31; XVIII. 31; XXIV. 26. 27; John XIII. 18. To the tempter himself He opposes sentences of Scripture (it is written), Matt. IV. 4. 7. 10.

2°. The Apostles confirm the same faith by the most ample use by which they employ Scripture as the instrument of divine doctrine and divine authority. For from the testification and authority of Scripture they prove the divine mission and dignity of Christ Himself, and the authority and divinity of their own doctrine and preaching; which indeed they neither could nor would effect by other than divine testimonies. How widely this use of the Scriptures extends is plain even from the formulas of citation alone — Scripture says, Scripture contains, it is written, etc. — which occur in the N. T. far more than a hundred times. That the force of the argument drawn from this most ample use may be understood, it is to be considered in a threefold form.

a) The Apostles employ the Scriptures in the literal sense as the word of God (cf. Mark VII. 13. with 10; Rom. III. 2) which every intellect serves, and which avails not by force of arguments but by its own inherent authority alone; so that the argument of divine and revealed truth and the whole force of the demonstration is constituted in the formulas: Scripture says, it is written — Acts I. 16; III. 18, 21; VIII. 32. ff.; XV. 15; XVII. 2; XVIII. 28; Rom. I. 2; III. 10. ff.; IV. 23; IX. 17; X. 11; XV. 4; 1. Cor. XV. 3. 4; Gal. III. 8.

b) They use the texts of the Scriptures most frequently according to the typical sense as no less true and efficacious by the authority of the word of God for proofs than is the literal sense: Matt. II. 15. with Ps. XI. 1; Matt. XIII. 35. with Ps. LXXVII. 2; John XIII. 18. with Ps. XL. 10; John XIX. 36. with Exod. XII. 46; Acts I. 16. 20. with Ps. LXVIII. 26; CVIII. 8; Gal. IV. 22. 24; Heb. II. 13. with Is. VIII. 17. 18. But while the Apostles employ the words of the Scriptures in this typical signification after the example of Christ Himself, by that very fact they suppose and set them forth as a divine book, because it is established from the very nature of the typical sense that God alone can be its author. « The spiritual sense of Sacred Scripture is taken from this, says St Thomas, that things in the course of their running signify something else, which is taken through the spiritual sense. But things are so ordered in their course that such a sense can be taken from them only by Him whose providence governs things, who is God alone... Whence in no science invented by human industry, properly speaking, can there be found anything but the literal sense, but only in that Scripture of which the Holy Spirit is the author, while man is the instrument » — St Th., Quodlib. VII, a. 16; cf. 1, q. 1, a. 10; the distinguished Fr. Patrizi, Institutions on the Interpretation of Scripture, ch. 8; ch. 9, a. 4; ch. 10, a. 1. Moreover by the very mode in which the Apostles employ this kind of interpretation without declaration or preparation, they suppose and approve a certain persuasion and faith, both in the Jews and in the first Christians, that such typical senses are contained in Scripture, and consequently they suppose and confirm the faith concerning the divinity of Scripture, since this is the first foundation of the typical sense.

c) The Apostles demonstrate the divinity of the Scriptures, after the example of Christ Himself, by the manner of arguing with which they use them. For they sometimes press single incidental words and phrases as divine authority for demonstrating the weightiest things. In general Christ the Lord Himself enunciates the principle: « till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall not pass from the law till all be fulfilled » Matt. V. 18; Luke XVI. 17. Resting on this principle, the argumentations of the Apostles occur everywhere. They gather fundamental truths and propose them as demonstrated revelation from the particle yet once more, Heb. XII. 17; from the added word new Testament, ibid. VIII. 8. with 13; from the names Melchisedech, Salem, and from the omitted genealogy of this king, ibid. VII. 2. 3; from the singular number in thy seed, Gal. III. 16; from the adjective faithful πιστα: « I will give you the holy ⁷ of David faithful » Acts XIII. 34. Cf. Matt. XXII. 32. 43. with Mark XII. 36; 1. Cor. IX. 9. 10. with 1. Tim. V. 18. But such a manner of arguing in the weightiest matters evidently supposes and declares the judgment concerning the supreme authority and divinity of the instrument. Christ Himself therefore, and the Apostles of Christ, confirmed in manifold wise by their very use of these books the faith which we saw the Jews to have had concerning this collection of books; nor therefore can the divine authority of all the books and of the parts of the books, to whichsoever the proper name of Scripture belongs, be called into doubt without contradicting the authority and manifest doctrine of Christ Himself and of the Apostles.