Page images
PDF
EPUB

from the admission of accidental variations in the text, through the ravages of time, which all admit; but such is not the case, for in relation to the obiter dictum, we are directly attacking the influence which the Holy Ghost had on the books; while, in the other case, we are only bringing to bear on documents, the light of critics, to determine whether or not the document has been preserved through the vicissitudes of time. St. Jerome, whom no one will accuse of excessive conservatism, held expressly that these details were inspired, and cited the instance of Paul's cloak. (Prol. in Phil. Tom. XXVI, col. 600.) The Fathers are unanimous in proclaiming for the Scriptures exemption from all error. The objection is made that these details are too minute for an inspiration, which, as we have stated, is a special influence of the Holy Ghost in the mind of the inspired writer; and that it would be unworthy of God to inspire such minutiæ; but we must remember that "Deus creavit Angelos in cœlis; vermiculos in terris, nec major fuit in illis, nec minor in istis." (St. Augustine, quoted by St. Jerome, ibid.) These details have their utility also. For instance, the description in Tobias is a vivid pen picture of the return of one to his home, after a protracted absence. St. Paul shows his simple and tender confidence in Timothy by bidding him bring his cloak from Troas. But what we assert for the obiter dicta as they came from the hand of the inspired writer, we do not, in any wise, assert for them, as they exist to-day. As the object of the Holy Scripture could be obtained without a stupendous miracle, wrought on the part of God, to preserve these from error, we admit that in these, owing to the various vicissitudes through which our Holy Books have passed, accidental errors may have occurred. In another treatise, we shall defend that the text of the Holy Scripture, as we have it to-day is substantially correct, but admits of accidental errors. Here we might quote the golden words of St. Augustine: "If, in the Holy Scriptures, we find aught that seems incredible, it is not to be said that the author of this book has not known the truth; but we should say: the manuscript is defective, or the transcriber erred, or we do not understand." Many of these errors are the result of the ignorance or inexactness of the transcribers; as, for instance, St. Jerome translates the NoAmon, Nahum III, 8. to be Alexandria, whereas Alexandria was not built by Alexander M. till three centuries later, and then was not the site of No-Amon, which was the city of Thebes,the capital of Upper Egypt. (Bible et Découverts Modernes, Volume, IV. 259—262.) Also St. Jerome confesses

[blocks in formation]

that he rendered the pp. of Jonas, by “hedera”, ivy, as he thought his readers unacquainted with the plant which is really signified, the ricinus, or Castor plant.

Moreover, as has already been stated, the Sacred writers make use of the common parlance of the people: "secundum opinionem populi loquitur Scriptura." (S. Th. 1. 2. 198.) A question of vital importance, in our days, is the relation of Scripture to Science. Men's minds have been active ever since the writing of Scripture itself, and have found many things unknown at the time of the writing of the Holy Books. They have delved down deep into the mysterious storehouse of nature, have discovered her treasures, have imprisoned her mighty forces to do their will, and serve them in the affairs of their civil and domestic life. They have penetrated the heavens, and investigated the secrets of the vast expanse which men call the firmament. Many truths, and many more or less reasonable hypotheses have been thus found out. But science, proud of her achievements, and restless under restraint, too oft turns her powers against the God-given truths of the Sacred Text, and here the warfare waxes bitter indeed, and many there are who incline too much to the side of science, even of those of the household of faith. The question, then, is asked: does inspiration extend to the scientific details of the Bible? God has not directly revealed the scientific truths of the Bible. This all admit, but, nevertheless, he could have indirectly revealed these, as they form a component factor in a narrative, the object of which is to teach men their relations to the Author of their being. The majority of Catholic interpreters hold that the scientific truths in Genesis are indirectly revealed. However, all scientific truths are inspired, in the sense that God impelled the Sacred writer to write those truths with infallible veracity and certainty. Hence, we join our voices with the voice of all the learned in asserting that the scope of the Holy Books was not to teach men science, while we demand immunity from error for those scientific assertions in this sense, that the truth intended to be conveyed by every sentence and proposition in the Bible, as it came from the pen of the writer, is inspired. Galileo, in a letter to the Grand Duchess of Milan, quoted a celebrated saying of Baronius: "Spiritui Sancto mentem fuisse nos docere quomodo ad cœlum eatur, non quomodo cœlum gradiatur." Since the time of Galileo, men have conceded that the Scripture spoke according to the common opinions of the people, and attributed significations to words, which the vulgar speech of the day warranted. For God made

infidel

Ann. Cyc. 1870, p.645.

use of a human medium to convey his message to man, and he did not startle the people by strange expressions, which would have been unintelligible to all people at that stage of human development. Men speak thus to-day, and are not accused of inexactness or with combating science. Hence, with this in mind, we can reconcile the assertions of true science with the inspired Word of God, for there can be no combat between truth and truth; for the Author of both human and divine science is the "Essential and Infinite Truth." For although faith is above reason, no real discussion, no real conflict can be found between them since both arise from one and the same fount of immutable and eternal truth, the great and good God. (Pius IX., Encyc. of Nov. 9, 1846.) Some hypotheses broached by the incredulous and shallow dabbler in science may conflict with the truths of Scripture, but this imports nothing. The Church blesses scientific research, and fears nothing therefrom. She invites investigation into every field of human thought, and only good to herself can come therefrom. The greatest astronomer of this century, Father Secchi, S. J., was one of her faithful children. The Vatican Council approved of scientific research explicitly, even when all the resources of science were brought to bear to oppose the Church. It leaves science free to use its own methods. "Neither does the Church forbid that these sciences should, in their own domain, use their own principles and method." (Conc. Vat. De Fide, IV.)

Hence we should guard against attributing to a passage of Scripture a signification, which in se it has not, but which may have been given to it by some interpreter. When we find by incontestable evidence that science has demonstrated a truth, which is in seeming opposition to what has by some been held to be the opinion gleaned from the Holy Scriptures, we should seek some other interpretation, which the text must bear, as truth and truth can not conflict, and we can thus reconcile these two truths coming from different sources. In this manner, we may reconcile Gen. I. 14: "And God said let there be luminaries in the firmament of heaven. .... And God made two great luminaries, a greater luminary to rule the day and a lesser luminary to rule the night, and the stars." Now it would seem from this that the stars were less in magnitude than the moon. As science has indisputably proven the contrary, what must we admit? That the inspired writer spoke according to the appearance of things, and for us the moon is a greater luminary than the stars. Hence, even the Sun is not necessarily asserted to be a greater luminary in fact than the stars, but only in appearance.

In relation to the inspiration of "dicta aliorum", no definite rule can be given. The character of the person, the circumstances in which such saying is uttered, the mode of quoting, and the nature of the proposition must be weighed. For instance, the sayings which the inspired writers make their own. by their approbation are inspired. St. Peter was inspired, when he confessed the divinity of Christ, not when he denied Christ. The words of impious men sometimes are quoted, but "in persona illorum," not intending them to be as truths. In regard to these, although no prior rule can be laid down, still there is no difficulty in distinguishing the true from the false.

CHAPTER IV.

THE CANON.

Canon, from Greek kavov, originally meant any straight rod or bar. From this basal signification were formed the cognate meanings of the amussis or carpenter's rule, the beam or tongue of the balance, and then, like norma, any rule or standard, whether in the physical or moral order. Hence, it came to be generally applied as a rule or measure of anything. It is much controverted and quite uncertain, just what particular shade of the general meaning the old writers had in mind, when they first applied this word to the official list of the Holy Books. Such question is, in fact, of no real value to any man, and yet writers quibble and haggle about it, as though upon it depended some great question. Some contend that, in pre-d dieting the term of the Holy Books, the early writers passed from the active signification of the term to its effect, and used the measure for the thing measured; thus the canon would be the list officially ruled and measured by the Church. Others hold that the said writers had in mind that the Holy Books formed a rule of faith and morals. I can not entertain as probable this second opinion; it seems far-fetched, and not well founded in what the early writers have written. I am of the persuasion that the term was applied to the collection of Scriptures to signify that such list formed the criterion and measure of a book's divine origin. The list was thus a rule; for only the books which satisfied its requirements, by being incorporated in it, were of divine authority. At all events, the signification of an official list of things or persons dates back to a great antiquity. Thus, in the Councils of Nice and Antioch, the catalogue of the sacred persons attached to any particular

licating

Church was called the canon. Thus, to-day, those who constitute the chapter are called Canons. The appositeness of the term, all must concede, for such sanctioned catalogue forms a measure of inspiration, and we receive only as inspired that which conforms to its measurement.

The canon of Holy Scripture then is the official catalogue of the Books that the Church authoritatively promulgates as the product of the Authorship of God.

This official list is found in the Council of Trent, Sess. 4, De Can. Script.: "The synod has thought good to subjoin to the decree an index of the Holy Books, lest to any man there should arise a doubt as to which are the books that are received by the said Synod. These are the following: Of the Old Testament, the five books of Moses, to wit: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Josue, Judges, Ruth, the four Books of Kings, the two Books of Paralipomenon, the First Book of Esdras and the Second, which is called that of Nehemias, Tobias, Judith, Esther, Job, the Davidic Psalter of 150 Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, The Canticle of Canticles, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Isaias, Jeremias with Baruch, Ezechiel, Daniel, The Twelve Minor Prophets, to wit: Hosea, Joel, Amos, Abdias, Jonas, Michæas, Nahum, Habukuk, Sophonias, Haggæus, Zachary, Malachy, and The First and Second of Maccabees. Of the New Testament: The Four Gospels, according to Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, the Acts of The Apostles, the fourteen Epistles of the Apostle St. Paul, to wit: The Epistle to the Romans, the two Epistles to the Corinthians, the Epistle to the Galatians, the Epistle to the Ephesians, the Epistle to the Philippians, the Epistle to the Colossians, the two Epistles to the Thessalonians, the two Epistles to Timothy, the Epistle to Titus, the Epistle to Philemon, the Epistle to the Hebrews; the two Epistles of St. Peter, the three Epistles of the Apostle John, one Epistle of the Apostle James, one Epistle of the Apostle Jude, and the Apocalypse of the Apostle John." In this catalogue, there are recorded fortyfive books of the Old Testament, and twenty-seven of the New. As the Holy Books are divided into two great classes, the Old and New Testament, so we must treat separately of the canons of these two Testaments.

CHAPTER V.

THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.

The books containing God's covenant to man are designated by three equivalent terms in the three great Scriptural

« PreviousContinue »