studyofthebible.epub.crdownload
1.9 MB
"Practical handbook for the study of the Bible and of Bible literature"
(including Biblical geography, antiquties, introduction to the Old and the new Testament, and hermeneutics)
by Seisenberger, Michael, 1832-; Buchanan, Anna Maud; Gerard, Thomas John, 1871-1916
#scripture
(including Biblical geography, antiquties, introduction to the Old and the new Testament, and hermeneutics)
by Seisenberger, Michael, 1832-; Buchanan, Anna Maud; Gerard, Thomas John, 1871-1916
#scripture
Where We Got the New Testament - Graham, Rev. Henry G._4510.pdf
339.3 KB
"Where We Got the Bible"
Henry G. Graham
This little book about the Bible grew out of lectures which the writer delivered on the subject to mixed audiences. The lectures were afterwards expanded, and appeared in a series of articles in the Catholic press 1908-1909, and are now with slight alterations reprinted. Their origin will sufficiently account for the colloquial style employed throughout.There is, therefore, no pretense either of profound scholarship or of eloquent language; all that is
attempted is a popular and, as far as possible, accurate exposition along familiar lines of the Catholic claim historically in regard to the Bible. It is candidly controversial without, however, let us hope, being uncharitable or unfair.
It is, then, undoubtedly true to say that, in the present order of Providence, it is owing to the Roman Catholic Church that we have a Bible at all.
#scripture
Henry G. Graham
This little book about the Bible grew out of lectures which the writer delivered on the subject to mixed audiences. The lectures were afterwards expanded, and appeared in a series of articles in the Catholic press 1908-1909, and are now with slight alterations reprinted. Their origin will sufficiently account for the colloquial style employed throughout.There is, therefore, no pretense either of profound scholarship or of eloquent language; all that is
attempted is a popular and, as far as possible, accurate exposition along familiar lines of the Catholic claim historically in regard to the Bible. It is candidly controversial without, however, let us hope, being uncharitable or unfair.
It is, then, undoubtedly true to say that, in the present order of Providence, it is owing to the Roman Catholic Church that we have a Bible at all.
#scripture
Article
The Role of the Theological Virtue of Faith in Scriptural Interpretation
Chad Ripperger, F.S.S.P., PhD
Summer 2006 (Vol. XXXI, no. 2) edition of Faith and Reason (Christendom Press).
In this article Chad Ripperger addresses the modernist/rationalist approach to understanding Sacred Scripture, specifically, the theological virtue of faith and its role in the study and interpretation of the Bible.
https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=8442
#scripture
The Role of the Theological Virtue of Faith in Scriptural Interpretation
Chad Ripperger, F.S.S.P., PhD
Summer 2006 (Vol. XXXI, no. 2) edition of Faith and Reason (Christendom Press).
In this article Chad Ripperger addresses the modernist/rationalist approach to understanding Sacred Scripture, specifically, the theological virtue of faith and its role in the study and interpretation of the Bible.
https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=8442
#scripture
www.catholicculture.org
Library : The Role of the Theological Virtue of Faith in Scriptural Interpretation
The Role of the Theological Virtue of Faith in Scriptural Interpretation In this article Chad Ripperger addresses the modernist/rationalist approach to understanding Sacred Scripture, specifically, the theological virtue of faith and its role in the study…
Ecce Verbum
Difficulties of Private Interpretation by Father G. Bampfleld, B. A., Oxon, 1879 I was a young man when my enquiry into truth began. I wished to save my soul--to know the truth and do the right; I asked myself and others how I was to find the truth ; the…
If I prayed to the Holy Spirit, so did he; if I was fully convinced, so was he; if to my spirit I hoped that "the Holy Spirit gave testimony that I was a child of God" (Rom. viii. 16), the same claim also did he make. How could I tell that he was wrong and I right? My prayers answered and his not? Was I holier than he? I dared not think so. Of one thing I was certain, that the Holy Ghost could not teach to me that a doctrine was true, and to him that the same doctrine was not true. One of us was wrong, and teaching, what God hates, a lie; but by what sure sign could I say who was wrong? Sometimes I was told that these differences were not essential points; but I could not understand this. Men certainly differ, for example, on the question whether Baptism is necessary to salvation or not. Surely a debate about a necessity is an essential point. In no worldly business, I am certain, in no question about the life of our bodies should we say, "Such a thing may be necessary, but it is not essential for us to know whether it is necessary or not."
Moreover, who would dare to tell us which part of our Lord's teaching was essential and which not? "Such a truth will save us, but such another truth He need not have brought from heaven." This I knew: that not one jot or one tittle of His words shall pass away (Matt. v. 18; Matt. xxiv. 35), and that to His words we dare not add nor take from them (Rev. xxii, 18, 19), but I knew not who was to be the judge of our Lord's teaching, and tell us which part we must believe and which we might reject. It is a marvel to me how men can believe that Christ, who is Love, has so left Christianity in the world, that nearly nineteen centuries have passed away, and men are still in doubt about the very necessities of salvation.
3. The third difficulty which came to me, when I was told to pray to the Holy Ghost and He would guide me, was this: "But then," was my reply, "if I can be mistaken when I interpret Scripture, how am I to tell when I am mistaken, and when not?" To this question I have to this day been unable to obtain an answer, except in the Catholic Church. I propose it once more for solution. The answer which I made to myself was that if our interpretations of Scripture are little more than guesses in which we might be mistaken, we could never tell if we were right or not; and that, as a result, the possession of truth was to us impossible: if we once admit doubt we cease to know it as a truth. Most of all should this be the case with religious truth: if heaven is not a certainty it were hard to struggle for it; if it be doubtful that there are three persons in God, who could worship them? What martyr would bleed for an opinion which was possibly false?
Our interpretations are fallible opinions, and opinions, however probable, are not certain truth. It seemed to me, then, that we had the choice of two evils, either to hold that each individual interpreter of Scripture is infallible, or to acknowledge that all interpretations of Scripture are fallible, and therefore all religious doctrines uncertain. I need not show the absurdity of the first alternative; for the upholders of private judgment are the very men who deny infallibility. I fear, then, we must accept the second, and own that there is no certain religious truth on earth, unless, indeed, the Catholic Church be right, and God has provided, in His mercy, a guide.
#scripture
Moreover, who would dare to tell us which part of our Lord's teaching was essential and which not? "Such a truth will save us, but such another truth He need not have brought from heaven." This I knew: that not one jot or one tittle of His words shall pass away (Matt. v. 18; Matt. xxiv. 35), and that to His words we dare not add nor take from them (Rev. xxii, 18, 19), but I knew not who was to be the judge of our Lord's teaching, and tell us which part we must believe and which we might reject. It is a marvel to me how men can believe that Christ, who is Love, has so left Christianity in the world, that nearly nineteen centuries have passed away, and men are still in doubt about the very necessities of salvation.
3. The third difficulty which came to me, when I was told to pray to the Holy Ghost and He would guide me, was this: "But then," was my reply, "if I can be mistaken when I interpret Scripture, how am I to tell when I am mistaken, and when not?" To this question I have to this day been unable to obtain an answer, except in the Catholic Church. I propose it once more for solution. The answer which I made to myself was that if our interpretations of Scripture are little more than guesses in which we might be mistaken, we could never tell if we were right or not; and that, as a result, the possession of truth was to us impossible: if we once admit doubt we cease to know it as a truth. Most of all should this be the case with religious truth: if heaven is not a certainty it were hard to struggle for it; if it be doubtful that there are three persons in God, who could worship them? What martyr would bleed for an opinion which was possibly false?
Our interpretations are fallible opinions, and opinions, however probable, are not certain truth. It seemed to me, then, that we had the choice of two evils, either to hold that each individual interpreter of Scripture is infallible, or to acknowledge that all interpretations of Scripture are fallible, and therefore all religious doctrines uncertain. I need not show the absurdity of the first alternative; for the upholders of private judgment are the very men who deny infallibility. I fear, then, we must accept the second, and own that there is no certain religious truth on earth, unless, indeed, the Catholic Church be right, and God has provided, in His mercy, a guide.
#scripture
Ecce Verbum
Difficulties of Private Interpretation by Father G. Bampfleld, B. A., Oxon, 1879 I was a young man when my enquiry into truth began. I wished to save my soul--to know the truth and do the right; I asked myself and others how I was to find the truth ; the…
St. Gregory of Nyssa
What is a Literal Reading?
The 4th century Father Gregory of Nyssa’s Life of Moses is often identified as the classic expression of how the Fathers approached the Bible and theology—as a journey upwards in union with God.
Many Christians today are concerned that science is forcing us to accommodate our understanding of Scripture to its findings. The literal or historical reading, so it is thought, is the only proper way to read Scripture, including Genesis 1-3. But Gregory’s historia suggests the possibility that our contemporary understanding of a literal reading should not be our focus when we read the Bible.
He does not attempt to look behind the texts in order to reconstruct the “true” historical nature of Moses’ encounter with Pharaoh. It is not the events behind the text that are the subject of his “history,” it is the words of Scripture itself. Gregory simply did not ask what Moses’ life was really like. Historia was not a reconstructed life of Moses conceived as truth alongside and in competition with the text. It was a retelling of the scriptural narrative, designed to make the episodes depicted in Scripture more accessible to the reader as s/he journeyed upwards to God.In the story of the risen Christ joining two men on the walk to Emmaus, we are told that they were already discussing the Resurrection. Jesus, “beginning with Moses and with all the prophets…explained to them the things concerning Himself in all the Scriptures” (Lk 24: 27). This is an entry point into patristic biblical interpretation because Christ identifies himself as central in it. The key to the meaning of Scripture, for the Church Fathers, is not the external history of Israel. Rather, it is Christ, and since Scripture points to Christ, this is a literal reading.
The Old Testament narrates the history of God’s action, and because of Christ it can no longer be viewed as history apart from him.Rather, it comes to be seen for what it really is—a “shadow” waiting for fulfillment in Christ.
The history of Israel narrated in the OT does not stand on its own. The Fathers read it as being illumined by Christ; the key to a literal reading. This, in turn, allowed them to see the reading of Scripture as part of a larger process of spiritual transformation in Christ.
For many Christians today, history is the controlling element in biblical interpretation. The text is seen as referring to an accessible external history and this becomes the focus.This emphasis on the history of the text “negates 1,600 years of Christian exegetical history, and, more important…sets aside as irrelevant the work of the earliest interpreters of the Christian Bible.” But Gregory of Nyssa and the Church Fathers encourage us to shift our focus.
Full text
https://biologos.org/articles/what-is-a-literal-reading-lessons-from-gregory-of-nyssa-and-augustine
biography
https://www.britannica.com/biography/Saint-Gregory-of-Nyssa#ref110371
#scripture
What is a Literal Reading?
The 4th century Father Gregory of Nyssa’s Life of Moses is often identified as the classic expression of how the Fathers approached the Bible and theology—as a journey upwards in union with God.
Many Christians today are concerned that science is forcing us to accommodate our understanding of Scripture to its findings. The literal or historical reading, so it is thought, is the only proper way to read Scripture, including Genesis 1-3. But Gregory’s historia suggests the possibility that our contemporary understanding of a literal reading should not be our focus when we read the Bible.
He does not attempt to look behind the texts in order to reconstruct the “true” historical nature of Moses’ encounter with Pharaoh. It is not the events behind the text that are the subject of his “history,” it is the words of Scripture itself. Gregory simply did not ask what Moses’ life was really like. Historia was not a reconstructed life of Moses conceived as truth alongside and in competition with the text. It was a retelling of the scriptural narrative, designed to make the episodes depicted in Scripture more accessible to the reader as s/he journeyed upwards to God.In the story of the risen Christ joining two men on the walk to Emmaus, we are told that they were already discussing the Resurrection. Jesus, “beginning with Moses and with all the prophets…explained to them the things concerning Himself in all the Scriptures” (Lk 24: 27). This is an entry point into patristic biblical interpretation because Christ identifies himself as central in it. The key to the meaning of Scripture, for the Church Fathers, is not the external history of Israel. Rather, it is Christ, and since Scripture points to Christ, this is a literal reading.
The Old Testament narrates the history of God’s action, and because of Christ it can no longer be viewed as history apart from him.Rather, it comes to be seen for what it really is—a “shadow” waiting for fulfillment in Christ.
The history of Israel narrated in the OT does not stand on its own. The Fathers read it as being illumined by Christ; the key to a literal reading. This, in turn, allowed them to see the reading of Scripture as part of a larger process of spiritual transformation in Christ.
For many Christians today, history is the controlling element in biblical interpretation. The text is seen as referring to an accessible external history and this becomes the focus.This emphasis on the history of the text “negates 1,600 years of Christian exegetical history, and, more important…sets aside as irrelevant the work of the earliest interpreters of the Christian Bible.” But Gregory of Nyssa and the Church Fathers encourage us to shift our focus.
Full text
https://biologos.org/articles/what-is-a-literal-reading-lessons-from-gregory-of-nyssa-and-augustine
biography
https://www.britannica.com/biography/Saint-Gregory-of-Nyssa#ref110371
#scripture
BioLogos
What is a Literal Reading?: Lessons from Gregory of Nyssa and Augustine - Article - BioLogos
A very helpful way of avoiding a myopic understanding of our own theories and conclusions is to examine how our forebears in the faith understood things.
Ecce Verbum
Unchangeable Church Teaching: What Can and Cannot Be Reformed in the Church by Fr. Michael Mueller, 1875 Q. What follows from the fact that the holy Roman Catholic Church can never be destroyed by any created power? A. That it would be the sin of heresy…
Holy Scripture and Tradition
by Fr. Michael Mueller, 1875
Q. What do you mean by Holy Scripture?
A. A collection of books which were written by holy men, inspired by the Holy Ghost, and acknowledged by the Catholic Church to be the written Word of God.
Q. How is Holy Scripture divided?
A. Into the books of the Old and the New Testament; or, of the Old and the New Law.
Q. What are we told in the books of the Old Testament?
A. In the books of the Old Testament we are told those truths which God made known before the coming of Christ.
Q. What are we told in the books of the New Testament?
A. Some of the truths which God made known through Jesus Christ and His Apostles.
Q. Is it easy for everyone to understand the Holy Scripture?
A. There is nothing more difficult than to understand the true meaning of every passage of the Scripture.
Q. How do we know this?
A. From Holy Scripture itself, which says that "there are certain things hard to be understood, which the unlearned and unstable wrest to their own destruction." 2 Peter iii. 16.
Q. May not everyone explain the Bible in his own private manner?
A. "No prophecy of the Scripture," says St. Peter, "is made by private interpretation." 2 Peter i. 20.
Q. To whom belongs the interpretation of the Holy Scriptures?
A. To the Catholic Church alone.
Q. Why?
A. "Because the Apostles carefully entrusted the Scriptures to their successors; and to whom the Scriptures were entrusted, to them also was committed the interpretation of Scripture."--St. Irenaeus.
Q. How does the Church make known the meaning of any passage of Scripture?
A. She makes it known either directly by a solemn definition, or by the universal consent of the Church dispersed throughout the world; and she makes it known indirectly when she tells us that we are to interpret Scripture in such a way that our interpretation shall be in harmony with her teaching upon all other points of Christian doctrine.
Q. Have any great evils followed from the unrestricted private interpretation of the Bible?
A. Yes; numberless heresies and impieties.
Q. What have the chief pastors of the Church done to guard the faithful against corrupted Bibles, and against erroneous interpretations of the Bible?
A. They have decreed--1. That, with regard to reading the Bible in the vernacular, we should have the learning and piety requisite for it. 2. That the translation should be approved by the Holy See, or accompanied with explanations by a Bishop.
Q. Why did you say that in the New Testament we are told some of the truths, and not all the truths which God made known through Jesus Christ and the Apostles?
A. Because all the truths preached by Jesus Christ and the Apostles are not recorded in the Bible.
Q. How do we know this?
A. From the Bible itself, which says: "Many other signs also did Jesus in the sight of His disciples, which are not written in this book." John xx. 30.
Q. Why did the Apostles not write down all that Jesus had taught?
A. Because Jesus Christ had not commanded them to write, but to preach His doctrine. "Go ye into the whole world and preach the Gospel to every creature."--Mark xvi.15.
Q. What is the unwritten doctrine of Jesus Christ and the Apostles called?
A. Tradition.
Q. How did the unwritten doctrine of Jesus Christ come down to us?
A. The Apostles took great care to instruct their disciples thoroughly, and make them capable of so instructing others. Thus their pure doctrine was delivered to the first Bishops and priests of the Catholic Church. By these, it was in like manner handed down to their successors; and so on, unimpaired, to those who, at the present time, teach in the Catholic Church.
Q. How do we know this?
A. We know it from what St. Paul writes in his Second Epistle to the Bishop Timothy (chap. 11.2), and from the early Fathers of the Church.
Q. What does St. Paul write?
A. "And the things which thou hast heard of me by many witnesses, the same commend to faithful men, who shall be fit to teach others also."
#scripture
by Fr. Michael Mueller, 1875
Q. What do you mean by Holy Scripture?
A. A collection of books which were written by holy men, inspired by the Holy Ghost, and acknowledged by the Catholic Church to be the written Word of God.
Q. How is Holy Scripture divided?
A. Into the books of the Old and the New Testament; or, of the Old and the New Law.
Q. What are we told in the books of the Old Testament?
A. In the books of the Old Testament we are told those truths which God made known before the coming of Christ.
Q. What are we told in the books of the New Testament?
A. Some of the truths which God made known through Jesus Christ and His Apostles.
Q. Is it easy for everyone to understand the Holy Scripture?
A. There is nothing more difficult than to understand the true meaning of every passage of the Scripture.
Q. How do we know this?
A. From Holy Scripture itself, which says that "there are certain things hard to be understood, which the unlearned and unstable wrest to their own destruction." 2 Peter iii. 16.
Q. May not everyone explain the Bible in his own private manner?
A. "No prophecy of the Scripture," says St. Peter, "is made by private interpretation." 2 Peter i. 20.
Q. To whom belongs the interpretation of the Holy Scriptures?
A. To the Catholic Church alone.
Q. Why?
A. "Because the Apostles carefully entrusted the Scriptures to their successors; and to whom the Scriptures were entrusted, to them also was committed the interpretation of Scripture."--St. Irenaeus.
Q. How does the Church make known the meaning of any passage of Scripture?
A. She makes it known either directly by a solemn definition, or by the universal consent of the Church dispersed throughout the world; and she makes it known indirectly when she tells us that we are to interpret Scripture in such a way that our interpretation shall be in harmony with her teaching upon all other points of Christian doctrine.
Q. Have any great evils followed from the unrestricted private interpretation of the Bible?
A. Yes; numberless heresies and impieties.
Q. What have the chief pastors of the Church done to guard the faithful against corrupted Bibles, and against erroneous interpretations of the Bible?
A. They have decreed--1. That, with regard to reading the Bible in the vernacular, we should have the learning and piety requisite for it. 2. That the translation should be approved by the Holy See, or accompanied with explanations by a Bishop.
Q. Why did you say that in the New Testament we are told some of the truths, and not all the truths which God made known through Jesus Christ and the Apostles?
A. Because all the truths preached by Jesus Christ and the Apostles are not recorded in the Bible.
Q. How do we know this?
A. From the Bible itself, which says: "Many other signs also did Jesus in the sight of His disciples, which are not written in this book." John xx. 30.
Q. Why did the Apostles not write down all that Jesus had taught?
A. Because Jesus Christ had not commanded them to write, but to preach His doctrine. "Go ye into the whole world and preach the Gospel to every creature."--Mark xvi.15.
Q. What is the unwritten doctrine of Jesus Christ and the Apostles called?
A. Tradition.
Q. How did the unwritten doctrine of Jesus Christ come down to us?
A. The Apostles took great care to instruct their disciples thoroughly, and make them capable of so instructing others. Thus their pure doctrine was delivered to the first Bishops and priests of the Catholic Church. By these, it was in like manner handed down to their successors; and so on, unimpaired, to those who, at the present time, teach in the Catholic Church.
Q. How do we know this?
A. We know it from what St. Paul writes in his Second Epistle to the Bishop Timothy (chap. 11.2), and from the early Fathers of the Church.
Q. What does St. Paul write?
A. "And the things which thou hast heard of me by many witnesses, the same commend to faithful men, who shall be fit to teach others also."
#scripture
Ecce Verbum
Holy Scripture and Tradition by Fr. Michael Mueller, 1875 Q. What do you mean by Holy Scripture? A. A collection of books which were written by holy men, inspired by the Holy Ghost, and acknowledged by the Catholic Church to be the written Word of God. …
2.
Q. Which of the early Fathers of the Church writes, when speaking of the ninety-first heresy: "All things are not found in the Holy Scripture, for the Apostles have taught us some by tradition, some by writing"?
A. St. Epiphanius.
Q. Who is it that writes: "Of the many truths of faith held by the Church, some have been received from the inspired writings, others from tradition; both sources are equally pure and certain"?
A. St. Basil, in his treatise on the Holy Ghost. Chap. xxvii.
Q. Is that which was taught by Jesus Christ and His Apostles, but which is not written, less true than that which is written?
A. The one is just as true as the other.
Q. Why?
A. Because the Apostles taught the true doctrine of Jesus Christ not less by their preaching, than by their writings, and the Holy Ghost expressed His will, as well by their tongues as by their pens.
Q. What follows from this?
A. That we must believe the unwritten Word of God as firmly as the written.
Q. Who assures us most emphatically of this?
A. St. Paul, in these words: "Therefore, brethren, stand fast; and hold the traditions which you have learned, whether by word, or by our Epistle."--2 Thess. 11. 14.
Q. Was this also the belief of the Fathers of the Church?
A. It was; for St. John Chrysostom writes, in his 4th homily on the Second Epistle of St. Paul to the Thessalonians: "Therefore it is evident that the Apostles taught many things without writing, which we must believe as firmly as those which are written."
Q. Name some of those truths of which the Bible does not speak, but which we believe from tradition?
A. We know only from tradition--1. That little children are to be baptized. 2. That we must keep holy the Sunday instead of the Saturday. 3. We know only from tradition those books which are divine, and contain the written word of God.
Q. But was it not possible that those truths which were taught by the Apostles, but were not written, might easily be corrupted, or forgotten altogether, because not recorded in Holy Scripture?
A. No; because God himself took care that what He had taught should not be forgotten, but be handed down to us uncorrupted.
Q. Was there any written Word of God for two thousand years, from Adam down to Moses?
A. There was not.
Q. How then did all that God spoke to Adam, Noah, etc., come down uncorrupted to Moses, who was the first to write down the Word of God?
A. By tradition; that is, God took care that the Patriarchs, His faithful servants, should hand down by word of mouth His doctrine uncorrupted from generation to generation.
Q. Could not, and did not God do the same from the time of the Apostles down to us?
A. He could, and did, by means of the faithful pastors of His Church.
Q. How did the pastors of His Church hand down to us the unwritten doctrine of the Apostles?
A. Partly by word of mouth and partly by their writings, in which they explain the doctrine of the Apostles, written and unwritten.
Q. What do we understand from this?
A. That, for example, the faith of the Catholic Church in the Real Presence of Jesus Christ in the Blessed Sacrament would have been at all times precisely what it is, had it pleased God that the passages in Holy Scripture, relating to it, had never been written; and so with all the rest of the teachings of the Catholic Church.
Q. Are the doctrines of the Catholic Church then entirely independent of Scripture?
A. They are; because she taught her doctrines, and they were believed by the early Christians before the New Testament was written--centuries, indeed, before the Bible was collected into its present form; and she would have done so, in precisely the same manner, had they never been written.
Q. What, do we mean when we say: "I believe the Holy Catholic Church"?
A.We mean that we firmly believe in the fact that Jesus Christ has established a visible church, endless in her duration, and infallible in her doctrine,which we must believe and obey without reserve, if we would obtain eternal salvation;and that this Church is no other than the Catholic Church.
#scripture
Q. Which of the early Fathers of the Church writes, when speaking of the ninety-first heresy: "All things are not found in the Holy Scripture, for the Apostles have taught us some by tradition, some by writing"?
A. St. Epiphanius.
Q. Who is it that writes: "Of the many truths of faith held by the Church, some have been received from the inspired writings, others from tradition; both sources are equally pure and certain"?
A. St. Basil, in his treatise on the Holy Ghost. Chap. xxvii.
Q. Is that which was taught by Jesus Christ and His Apostles, but which is not written, less true than that which is written?
A. The one is just as true as the other.
Q. Why?
A. Because the Apostles taught the true doctrine of Jesus Christ not less by their preaching, than by their writings, and the Holy Ghost expressed His will, as well by their tongues as by their pens.
Q. What follows from this?
A. That we must believe the unwritten Word of God as firmly as the written.
Q. Who assures us most emphatically of this?
A. St. Paul, in these words: "Therefore, brethren, stand fast; and hold the traditions which you have learned, whether by word, or by our Epistle."--2 Thess. 11. 14.
Q. Was this also the belief of the Fathers of the Church?
A. It was; for St. John Chrysostom writes, in his 4th homily on the Second Epistle of St. Paul to the Thessalonians: "Therefore it is evident that the Apostles taught many things without writing, which we must believe as firmly as those which are written."
Q. Name some of those truths of which the Bible does not speak, but which we believe from tradition?
A. We know only from tradition--1. That little children are to be baptized. 2. That we must keep holy the Sunday instead of the Saturday. 3. We know only from tradition those books which are divine, and contain the written word of God.
Q. But was it not possible that those truths which were taught by the Apostles, but were not written, might easily be corrupted, or forgotten altogether, because not recorded in Holy Scripture?
A. No; because God himself took care that what He had taught should not be forgotten, but be handed down to us uncorrupted.
Q. Was there any written Word of God for two thousand years, from Adam down to Moses?
A. There was not.
Q. How then did all that God spoke to Adam, Noah, etc., come down uncorrupted to Moses, who was the first to write down the Word of God?
A. By tradition; that is, God took care that the Patriarchs, His faithful servants, should hand down by word of mouth His doctrine uncorrupted from generation to generation.
Q. Could not, and did not God do the same from the time of the Apostles down to us?
A. He could, and did, by means of the faithful pastors of His Church.
Q. How did the pastors of His Church hand down to us the unwritten doctrine of the Apostles?
A. Partly by word of mouth and partly by their writings, in which they explain the doctrine of the Apostles, written and unwritten.
Q. What do we understand from this?
A. That, for example, the faith of the Catholic Church in the Real Presence of Jesus Christ in the Blessed Sacrament would have been at all times precisely what it is, had it pleased God that the passages in Holy Scripture, relating to it, had never been written; and so with all the rest of the teachings of the Catholic Church.
Q. Are the doctrines of the Catholic Church then entirely independent of Scripture?
A. They are; because she taught her doctrines, and they were believed by the early Christians before the New Testament was written--centuries, indeed, before the Bible was collected into its present form; and she would have done so, in precisely the same manner, had they never been written.
Q. What, do we mean when we say: "I believe the Holy Catholic Church"?
A.We mean that we firmly believe in the fact that Jesus Christ has established a visible church, endless in her duration, and infallible in her doctrine,which we must believe and obey without reserve, if we would obtain eternal salvation;and that this Church is no other than the Catholic Church.
#scripture
Sacred Scripture- texts and Bible study index
Douay-Rheims + Vulgate
Polyglot Bible (Greek/Hebrew/Latin/English)
Vulgata Clementina
Biblia Clerus (Cong. for the Clergy
Lectio Divina (from Fisheraters)
Neo-Patristic Approach to Scripture
St. Jerome Biblical Guild
St. Thomas Aquinas Scripture
Commentaries
Patristic Bible Commentary
Cornelius à Lapide - New Testament Commentary
Catena Aurea: A Patristic Commentary on the Gospels, compiled by St. Thomas Aquinas
Reflections on Scripture
The Interpretation of the Bible in the Church
*This index is in the process of expansion, all suggestions are welcome
#index #scripture
Douay-Rheims + Vulgate
Polyglot Bible (Greek/Hebrew/Latin/English)
Vulgata Clementina
Biblia Clerus (Cong. for the Clergy
Lectio Divina (from Fisheraters)
Neo-Patristic Approach to Scripture
St. Jerome Biblical Guild
St. Thomas Aquinas Scripture
Commentaries
Patristic Bible Commentary
Cornelius à Lapide - New Testament Commentary
Catena Aurea: A Patristic Commentary on the Gospels, compiled by St. Thomas Aquinas
Reflections on Scripture
The Interpretation of the Bible in the Church
*This index is in the process of expansion, all suggestions are welcome
#index #scripture
drbo.org
Douay-Rheims Bible Online, Official Catholic Version with Search.
Douay-Rheims Bible Online, Roman Catholic Bible Verses, Search Scriptures, Challoner Footnotes.
Ecce Verbum
St. Gregory of Nyssa What is a Literal Reading? The 4th century Father Gregory of Nyssa’s Life of Moses is often identified as the classic expression of how the Fathers approached the Bible and theology—as a journey upwards in union with God. Many Christians…
HowWeUnderstandBible.pdf
1.2 MB
Article
How we understand the Bible
Thomas Storck
On the mistakes of the Bible interpretation, beginning with fundamentalism and ending on modernism.
Thomas Storck is a former Episcopalian, now- the author of Foundations of a Catholic Political Order, The Catholic Milieu, and Christendom and the West. His recent book is An Economics of Justice & Charity. Mr. Storck serves on the editorial board of The Chesterton Review and he is a contributing editor of The Distributist Review.
See also:
An interview with Thomas Storck
Storck's conversion story
What is literal Bible reading
The role of theological virtue of faith in scriptural interpretation
Tradition, the unwritten Word of God
Holy Scripture and Tradition
#scripture
How we understand the Bible
Thomas Storck
On the mistakes of the Bible interpretation, beginning with fundamentalism and ending on modernism.
Thomas Storck is a former Episcopalian, now- the author of Foundations of a Catholic Political Order, The Catholic Milieu, and Christendom and the West. His recent book is An Economics of Justice & Charity. Mr. Storck serves on the editorial board of The Chesterton Review and he is a contributing editor of The Distributist Review.
See also:
An interview with Thomas Storck
Storck's conversion story
What is literal Bible reading
The role of theological virtue of faith in scriptural interpretation
Tradition, the unwritten Word of God
Holy Scripture and Tradition
#scripture
Ecce Verbum
Difficulties of Private Interpretation by Father G. Bampfleld, B. A., Oxon, 1879 I was a young man when my enquiry into truth began. I wished to save my soul--to know the truth and do the right; I asked myself and others how I was to find the truth ; the…
The authority of Church's interpretation of Scripture
St. Vincent of Lerins
"But here some one perhaps will ask, Since the canon of Scripture is complete, and sufficient of itself for everything, and more than sufficient, what need is there to join with it the authority of the Church's interpretation? For this reason — because, owing to the depth of Holy Scripture, all do not accept it in one and the same sense, but one understands its words in one way, another in another; so that it seems to be capable of as many interpretations as there are interpreters. For Novatian expounds it one way, Sabellius another, Donatus another, Arius, Eunomius, Macedonius, another, Photinus, Apollinaris, Priscillian, another, Iovinian, Pelagius, Celestius, another, lastly, Nestorius another. Therefore, it is very necessary, on account of so great intricacies of such various error, that the rule for the right understanding of the prophets and apostles should be framed in accordance with the standard of Ecclesiastical and Catholic interpretation.
Moreover, in the Catholic Church itself, all possible care must be taken, that we hold that faith which has been believed everywhere, always, by all. For that is truly and in the strictest sense Catholic, which, as the name itself and the reason of the thing declare, comprehends all universally. This rule we shall observe if we follow universality, antiquity, consent. We shall follow universality if we confess that one faith to be true, which the whole Church throughout the world confesses; antiquity, if we in no wise depart from those interpretations which it is manifest were notoriously held by our holy ancestors and fathers; consent, in like manner, if in antiquity itself we adhere to the consentient definitions and determinations of all, or at the least of almost all priests and doctors."
full text
text analysis
about St. Vincent
difficulties of private interpretation
the role of theological virtue of faith in Scriptural interpretation
what is literal reading?
Holy Scripture and Tradition
#scripture
St. Vincent of Lerins
"But here some one perhaps will ask, Since the canon of Scripture is complete, and sufficient of itself for everything, and more than sufficient, what need is there to join with it the authority of the Church's interpretation? For this reason — because, owing to the depth of Holy Scripture, all do not accept it in one and the same sense, but one understands its words in one way, another in another; so that it seems to be capable of as many interpretations as there are interpreters. For Novatian expounds it one way, Sabellius another, Donatus another, Arius, Eunomius, Macedonius, another, Photinus, Apollinaris, Priscillian, another, Iovinian, Pelagius, Celestius, another, lastly, Nestorius another. Therefore, it is very necessary, on account of so great intricacies of such various error, that the rule for the right understanding of the prophets and apostles should be framed in accordance with the standard of Ecclesiastical and Catholic interpretation.
Moreover, in the Catholic Church itself, all possible care must be taken, that we hold that faith which has been believed everywhere, always, by all. For that is truly and in the strictest sense Catholic, which, as the name itself and the reason of the thing declare, comprehends all universally. This rule we shall observe if we follow universality, antiquity, consent. We shall follow universality if we confess that one faith to be true, which the whole Church throughout the world confesses; antiquity, if we in no wise depart from those interpretations which it is manifest were notoriously held by our holy ancestors and fathers; consent, in like manner, if in antiquity itself we adhere to the consentient definitions and determinations of all, or at the least of almost all priests and doctors."
full text
text analysis
about St. Vincent
difficulties of private interpretation
the role of theological virtue of faith in Scriptural interpretation
what is literal reading?
Holy Scripture and Tradition
#scripture
www.newadvent.org
CHURCH FATHERS: Commonitorium (Vincent of Lerins)
Featuring the Church Fathers, Catholic Encyclopedia, Summa Theologica and more.
Ecce Verbum
The authority of Church's interpretation of Scripture St. Vincent of Lerins "But here some one perhaps will ask, Since the canon of Scripture is complete, and sufficient of itself for everything, and more than sufficient, what need is there to join with it…
The Successor of Peter and Biblical Interpretation
“The Bishop of Rome sits upon the Chair to bear witness to Christ. Thus, the Chair is the symbol of the potestas docendi, the power to teach that is an essential part of the mandate of binding and loosing which the Lord conferred on Peter, and after him, on the Twelve. In the Church, Sacred Scripture, the understanding of which increases under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, and the ministry of its authentic interpretation that was conferred upon the Apostles, are indissolubly bound. Whenever Sacred Scripture is separated from the living voice of the Church, it falls prey to disputes among experts.
Of course, all they have to tell us is important and invaluable; the work of scholars is a considerable help in understanding the living process in which the Scriptures developed, hence, also in grasping their historical richness.
Yet science alone cannot provide us with a definitive and binding interpretation; it is unable to offer us, in its interpretation, that certainty with which we can live and for which we can even die. A greater mandate is necessary for this, which cannot derive from human abilities alone. The voice of the living Church is essential for this, of the Church entrusted until the end of time to Peter and to the College of the Apostles.
This power of teaching frightens many people in and outside the Church. They wonder whether freedom of conscience is threatened or whether it is a presumption opposed to freedom of thought. It is not like this. The power that Christ conferred upon Peter and his Successors is, in an absolute sense, a mandate to serve. The power of teaching in the Church involves a commitment to the service of obedience to the faith. The Pope is not an absolute monarch whose thoughts and desires are law. On the contrary: the Pope’s ministry is a guarantee of obedience to Christ and to his Word. He must not proclaim his own ideas, but rather constantly bind himself and the Church to obedience to God’s Word, in the face of every attempt to adapt it or water it down, and every form of opportunism.”
The Pope knows that in his important decisions, he is bound to the great community of faith of all times, to the binding interpretations that have developed throughout the Church's pilgrimage. Thus, his power is not being above, but at the service of, the Word of God. It is incumbent upon him to ensure that this Word continues to be present in its greatness and to resound in its purity, so that it is not torn to pieces by continuous changes in usage.
Benedict XVI, 2005
source
***Papal teaching, then, including exercises of the extraordinary Magisterium, cannot contradict Scripture, Tradition, or previous binding papal teaching. Nor can it introduce utter novelties. Popes have authority only to preserve and interpret what they have received. They can draw out the implications of previous teaching or clarify it where it is ambiguous. They can make formally binding what was already informally taught. But they cannot reverse past teaching and they cannot make up new doctrines out of whole cloth.
***Along the same lines, the Second Vatican Council taught, in Dei Verbum, that the Church cannot teach contrary to Scripture:
"The living teaching office of the Church… is not above the word of God, but serves it, teaching only what has been handed on, listening to it devoutly, guarding it scrupulously and explaining it faithfully"
***The pope would not be speaking infallibly if he taught something that either had no basis in Scripture, Tradition, or previous magisterial teaching, or contradicted those sources of doctrine.
#scripture #tradition #pope
“The Bishop of Rome sits upon the Chair to bear witness to Christ. Thus, the Chair is the symbol of the potestas docendi, the power to teach that is an essential part of the mandate of binding and loosing which the Lord conferred on Peter, and after him, on the Twelve. In the Church, Sacred Scripture, the understanding of which increases under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, and the ministry of its authentic interpretation that was conferred upon the Apostles, are indissolubly bound. Whenever Sacred Scripture is separated from the living voice of the Church, it falls prey to disputes among experts.
Of course, all they have to tell us is important and invaluable; the work of scholars is a considerable help in understanding the living process in which the Scriptures developed, hence, also in grasping their historical richness.
Yet science alone cannot provide us with a definitive and binding interpretation; it is unable to offer us, in its interpretation, that certainty with which we can live and for which we can even die. A greater mandate is necessary for this, which cannot derive from human abilities alone. The voice of the living Church is essential for this, of the Church entrusted until the end of time to Peter and to the College of the Apostles.
This power of teaching frightens many people in and outside the Church. They wonder whether freedom of conscience is threatened or whether it is a presumption opposed to freedom of thought. It is not like this. The power that Christ conferred upon Peter and his Successors is, in an absolute sense, a mandate to serve. The power of teaching in the Church involves a commitment to the service of obedience to the faith. The Pope is not an absolute monarch whose thoughts and desires are law. On the contrary: the Pope’s ministry is a guarantee of obedience to Christ and to his Word. He must not proclaim his own ideas, but rather constantly bind himself and the Church to obedience to God’s Word, in the face of every attempt to adapt it or water it down, and every form of opportunism.”
The Pope knows that in his important decisions, he is bound to the great community of faith of all times, to the binding interpretations that have developed throughout the Church's pilgrimage. Thus, his power is not being above, but at the service of, the Word of God. It is incumbent upon him to ensure that this Word continues to be present in its greatness and to resound in its purity, so that it is not torn to pieces by continuous changes in usage.
Benedict XVI, 2005
source
***Papal teaching, then, including exercises of the extraordinary Magisterium, cannot contradict Scripture, Tradition, or previous binding papal teaching. Nor can it introduce utter novelties. Popes have authority only to preserve and interpret what they have received. They can draw out the implications of previous teaching or clarify it where it is ambiguous. They can make formally binding what was already informally taught. But they cannot reverse past teaching and they cannot make up new doctrines out of whole cloth.
***Along the same lines, the Second Vatican Council taught, in Dei Verbum, that the Church cannot teach contrary to Scripture:
"The living teaching office of the Church… is not above the word of God, but serves it, teaching only what has been handed on, listening to it devoutly, guarding it scrupulously and explaining it faithfully"
***The pope would not be speaking infallibly if he taught something that either had no basis in Scripture, Tradition, or previous magisterial teaching, or contradicted those sources of doctrine.
#scripture #tradition #pope
www.vatican.va
Dei verbum
Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation - Dei verbum
Ecce Verbum
Scientific knowledge and virtue "Roger Bacon, who is considered the earliest founder of the scientific method based upon Aristotle’s logic, said the following in his Sixth Part of the Opus Majus on Experimental Science “For this reason true philosophers…
The right understanding of the Scriptures requires virtue
St. Athanasius, On the Incarnation of the Word:
"But for the searching and right understanding of the Scriptures there is need of a good life and a pure soul, and for Christian virtue to guide the mind to grasp, so far as human nature can, the truth concerning God the Word.
One cannot possibly understand the teaching of the saints unless one has a pure mind and is trying to imitate their life. Anyone who wants to look at sunlight naturally wipes his eye clear first, in order to make, at any rate, some approximation to the purity of that on which he looks; and a person wishing to see a city or country goes to the place in order to do so.
Similarly, anyone who wishes to understand the mind of the sacred writers must first cleanse his own life, and approach the saints by copying their deeds. Thus united to them in the fellowship of life, he will both understand the things revealed to them by God and, thenceforth escaping the peril that threatens sinners in the judgment, will receive that which is laid up for the saints in the kingdom of heaven. Of that reward it is written: "Eye hath not seen nor ear heard, neither hath entered into the heart of man the things that God has prepared" for them that live a godly life and love the God and Father in Christ Jesus our Lord, through Whom and with Whom be to the Father Himself, with the Son Himself, in the Holy Spirit, honor and might and glory to ages of ages."
#scripture
St. Athanasius, On the Incarnation of the Word:
"But for the searching and right understanding of the Scriptures there is need of a good life and a pure soul, and for Christian virtue to guide the mind to grasp, so far as human nature can, the truth concerning God the Word.
One cannot possibly understand the teaching of the saints unless one has a pure mind and is trying to imitate their life. Anyone who wants to look at sunlight naturally wipes his eye clear first, in order to make, at any rate, some approximation to the purity of that on which he looks; and a person wishing to see a city or country goes to the place in order to do so.
Similarly, anyone who wishes to understand the mind of the sacred writers must first cleanse his own life, and approach the saints by copying their deeds. Thus united to them in the fellowship of life, he will both understand the things revealed to them by God and, thenceforth escaping the peril that threatens sinners in the judgment, will receive that which is laid up for the saints in the kingdom of heaven. Of that reward it is written: "Eye hath not seen nor ear heard, neither hath entered into the heart of man the things that God has prepared" for them that live a godly life and love the God and Father in Christ Jesus our Lord, through Whom and with Whom be to the Father Himself, with the Son Himself, in the Holy Spirit, honor and might and glory to ages of ages."
#scripture