ENCYCLICAL OF POPE
BENEDICT XV ON ST. JEROME
TO ALL THE PATRIARCHS, PRIMATES, ARCHBISHOPS,
BISHOPS, AND ORDINARIES IN UNION WITH THE APOSTOLIC
SEE.
1. Since the Holy Spirit, the Comforter,
had bestowed the Scriptures on the human race
for their instruction in Divine things, He also
raised up in successive ages saintly and learned
men whose task it should be to develop that
treasure and so provide for the faithful plenteous
"consolation from the Scriptures."[1]
Foremost among these teachers stands St. Jerome.
Him the Catholic Church acclaims and reveres
as her "Greatest Doctor," divinely
given her for the understanding of the Bible.
And now that the fifteenth centenary of his
death is approaching we would not willingly
let pass so favorable an opportunity of addressing
you on the debt we owe him. For the responsibility
of our Apostolic office impels us to set before
you his wonderful example and so promote the
study of Holy Scripture in accordance with the
teaching of our predecessors, Leo XIII and Pius
X, which we desire to apply more precisely still
to the present needs of the Church. For St.
Jerome - "strenuous Catholic, learned in
the Scriptures,"[2] "teacher of Catholics,"[3]
"model of virtue, world's teacher"[4]
- has by his earnest and illuminative defense
of Catholic doctrine on Holy Scripture left
us most precious instructions. These we propose
to set before you and so promote among the children
of the Church, and especially among the clergy,
assiduous and reverent study of the Bible.
2. No need to remind you, Venerable
Brethren, that Jerome was born in Stridonia,
in a town "on the borders of Dalmatia and
Pannonia";[5] that from his infancy he
was brought up a Catholic;[6] that after his
baptism here in Rome[7] he lived to an advanced
age and devoted all his powers to studying,
expounding, and defending the Bible. At Rome
he had learned Latin and Greek, and hardly had
he left the school of rhetoric than he ventured
on a Commentary on Abdias the Prophet. This
"youthful piece of work"[8] kindled
in him such love of the Bible that he decided
- like the man in the Gospel who found a treasure
- to spurn "any emoluments the world could
provide,"[9] and devote himself wholly
to such studies. Nothing could deter him from
this stern resolve. He left home, parents, sister,
and relatives; he denied himself the more delicate
food he had been accustomed to, and went to
the East so that he might gather from studious
reading of the Bible the fuller riches of Christ
and true knowledge of his Savior.[10] Jerome
himself tells us in several places how assiduously
he toiled:
An eager desire to learn obsessed me. But I
was not so foolish as to try and teach myself.
At Antioch I regularly attended the lectures
of Apollinaris of Laodicea; but while I learned
much from him about the Bible, I would never
accept his doubtful teaching about its interpretation.[11]
3. From Antioch be betook to the desert
of Chalcis, in Syria, to perfect himself in
his knowledge of the Bible, and at the same
time to curb "youthful desires" by
means of hard study. Here he engaged a convert
Jew to teach him Hebrew and Chaldaic.
What a toil it was! How difficult I found it!
How often I was on the point of giving it up
in despair, and yet in my eagerness to learn
took it up again! Myself can bear witness of
this, and so, too, can those who had lived with
me at the time. Yet I thank God for the fruit
I won from that bitter seed.[12]
4. Lest, however, he should grow idle
in this desert where there were no heretics
to vex him, Jerome betook himself to Constantinople,
where for nearly three years he studied Holy
Scripture under St. Gregory the Theologian,
then Bishop of that See and in the height of
his fame as a teacher. While there he translated
into Latin Origen's Homilies on the Prophets
and Eusebius' Chronicle; he also wrote on Isaias'
vision of the Seraphim. He then returned to
Rome on ecclesiastical business, and Pope Damasus
admitted him into his court.[13] However, he
let nothing distract him from continual occupation
with the Bible,[14] and the task of copying
various manuscripts,[15] as well as answering
the many questions put to him by students of
both sexes.[16]
5. Pope Damasus had entrusted to him
a most laborious task, the correction of the
Latin text of the Bible. So well did Jerome
carry this out that even today men versed in
such studies appreciate its value more and more.
But he ever yearned for Palestine, and when
the Pope died he retired to Bethlehem to a monastery
nigh to the cave where Christ was born. Every
moment he could spare from prayer he gave to
Biblical studies.
Though my hair was now growing gray and though
I looked more like professor than student, yet
I went to Alexandria to attend Didymus' lectures.
I owe him much. What I did not know I learned.
What I knew already I did not lose through his
different presentation of it. Men thought I
had done with tutors; but when I got back to
Jerusalem and Bethlehem how hard I worked and
what a price I paid for my night-time teacher
Baraninus! Like another Nicodemus he was afraid
of the Jews![17]
6. Nor was Jerome content merely to
gather up this or that teacher's words; he gathered
from all quarters whatever might prove of use
to him in this task. From the outset he had
accumulated the best possible copies of the
Bible and the best commentators on it, but now
he worked on copies from the synagogues and
from the library formed at Caesarea by Origen
and Eusebius; he hoped by assiduous comparison
of texts to arrive at greater certainty touching
the actual text and its meaning. With this same
purpose he went all through Palestine. For he
was thoroughly convinced of the truth of what
he once wrote to Domnio and Rogatian:
A man will understand the Bible better if he
has seen Judaea with his own eyes and discovered
its ancient cities and sites either under the
old names or newer ones. In company with some
learned Hebrews I went through the entire land
the names of whose sites are on every Christian's
lips.[18]
7. He nourished his soul unceasingly
on this most pleasant food: he explained St.
Paul's Epistles; he corrected the Latin version
of the Old Testament by the Greek; he translated
afresh nearly all the books of the Old Testament
from Hebrew into Latin; day by day he discussed
Biblical questions with the brethren who came
to him, and answered letters on Biblical questions
which poured in upon him from all sides; besides
all this, he was constantly refuting men who
assailed Catholic doctrine and unity. Indeed,
such was his love for Holy Scripture that he
ceased not from writing or dictating till his
hand stiffened in death and his voice was silent
forever. So it was that, sparing himself neither
labor nor watching nor expense, he continued
to extreme old age meditating day and night
beside the Crib on the Law of the Lord; of greater
profit to the Catholic cause by his life and
example in his solitude than if he had passed
his life at Rome, the capital of the world.
8. After this preliminary account of
St. Jerome's life and labors we may now treat
of his teaching on the divine dignity and absolute
truth of Scripture.
You will not find a page in his writings which
does not show clearly that he, in common with
the whole Catholic Church, firmly and consistently
held that the Sacred Books - written as they
were under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit
- have God for their Author, and as such were
delivered to the Church. Thus he asserts that
the Books of the Bible were composed at the
inspiration, or suggestion, or even at the dictation
of the Holy Spirit; even that they were written
and edited by Him. Yet he never questions but
that the individual authors of these Books worked
in full freedom under the Divine afflatus, each
of them in accordance with his individual nature
and character. Thus he is not merely content
to affirm as a general principle - what indeed
pertains to all the sacred writers - that they
followed the Spirit of God as they wrote, in
such sort that God is the principal cause of
all that Scripture means and says; but he also
accurately describes what pertains to each individual
writer. In each case Jerome shows us how, in
composition, in language, in style and mode
of expression, each of them uses his own gifts
and powers; hence he is able to portray and
describe for us their individual character,
almost their very features; this is especially
so in his treatment of the Prophets and of St.
Paul. This partnership of God and man in the
production of a work in common Jerome illustrates
by the case of a workman who uses instruments
for the production of his work; for he says
that whatsoever the sacred authors say "Is
the word of God, and not their own; and what
the Lord says by their mouths He says, as it
were, by means of an instrument."[19]
9. If we ask how we are to explain this
power and action of God, the principal cause,
on the sacred writers we shall find that St.
Jerome in no wise differs from the common teaching
of the Catholic Church. For he holds that God,
through His grace, illumines the writer's mind
regarding the particular truth which, "in
the person of God," he is to set before
men; he holds, moreover, that God moves the
writer's will - nay, even impels it - to write;
finally, that God abides with him unceasingly,
in unique fashion, until his task is accomplished.
Whence the Saint infers the supreme excellence
and dignity of Scripture, and declares that
knowledge of it is to be likened to the "treasure"[20]
and the "pearl beyond price,"[21]
since in them are to be found the riches of
Christ[22] and "silver wherewith to adorn
God's house."[23]
10. Jerome also insists on the supereminent
authority of Scripture. When controversy arose
he had recourse to the Bible as a storehouse
of arguments, and he used its testimony as a
weapon for refuting his adversaries' arguments,
because he held that the Bible's witness afforded
solid and irrefutable arguments. Thus, when
Helvidius denied the perpetual virginity of
the Mother of God, Jerome was content simply
to reply:
Just as we do not deny these things which are
written, so do we repudiate things that are
not written. That God was born of a Virgin we
believe, because we read it. That Mary was married
after His birth we do not believe because we
do not read it.[24]
11. In the same fashion he undertakes
to defend against Jovinian, with precisely the
same weapons, the Catholic doctrines of the
virginal state, of perseverance, of abstinence,
and of the merit of good works:
In refuting his statements I shall rely especially
on the testimony of Scripture, lest he should
grumble and complain that he has been vanquished
rather by my eloquence than by the truth.[25]
12. So, too, when defending himself
against the same Helvidius, he says: "He
was, you might say, begged to yield to me, and
be led away as a willing and unresisting captive
in the bonds of truth."[26] Again, "We
must not follow the errors of our parents, nor
of those who have gone before us; we have the
authority of the Scriptures and God's teaching
to command us."[27] Once more, when showing
Fabiola how to deal with critics, he says:
When you are really instructed in the Divine
Scriptures, and have realized that its laws
and testimonies are the bonds of truth, then
you can contend with adversaries; then you will
fetter them and lead them bound into captivity;
then of the foes you have made captive you will
make freemen of God.[28]
13. Jerome further shows that the immunity
of Scripture from error or deception is necessarily
bound up with its Divine inspiration and supreme
authority. He says he had learnt this in the
most celebrated schools, whether of East or
West, and that it was taught him as the doctrine
of the Fathers, and generally received. Thus
when, at the instance of Pope Damasus, he had
begun correcting the Latin text of the New Testament,
and certain "manikins" had vehemently
attacked him for "making corrections in
the Gospels in face of the authority of the
Fathers and of general opinion," Jerome
briefly replied that he was not so utterly stupid
nor so grossly uneducated as to imagine that
the Lord's words needed any correction or were
not divinely inspired.[29] Similarly, when explaining
Ezechiel's first vision as portraying the Four
Gospels, he remarks:
That the entire body and the back were full
of eyes will be plain to anybody who realizes
that there is nought in the Gospels which does
not shine and illumine the world by its splendor,
so that even things that seem trifling and unimportant
shine with the majesty of the Holy Spirit.[30]
14. What he has said here of the Gospels
he applies in his Commentaries to the rest of
the Lord's words; he regards it as the very
rule and foundation of Catholic interpretation;
indeed, for Jerome, a true prophet was to be
distinguished from a false by this very note
of truth:[31] "The Lord's words are true;
for Him to say it, means that it is."[32]
Again, "Scripture cannot lie";[33]
it is wrong to say Scripture lies, nay, it is
impious even to admit the very notion of error
where the Bible is concerned.[34] "The
Apostles," he says, "are one thing;
other writers" - that is, profane writers
- "are another;"[35] "the former
always tell the truth; the latter - as being
mere men - sometimes err,"[36] and though
many things are said in the Bible which seem
incredible, yet they are true;[37] in this "word
of truth" you cannot find things or statements
which are contradictory, "there is nothing
discordant nor conflicting";[38] consequently,
"when Scripture seems to be in conflict
with itself both passages are true despite their
diversity."[39]
15. Holding principles like these, Jerome
was compelled, when he discovered apparent discrepancies
in the Sacred Books, to use every endeavor to
unravel the difficulty. If he felt that he had
not satisfactorily settled the problem, he would
return to it again and again, not always, indeed,
with the happiest results. Yet he would never
accuse the sacred writers of the slightest mistake
- "that we leave to impious folk like Celsus,
Porphyry, and Julian."[40] Here he is in
full agreement with Augustine, who wrote to
Jerome that to the Sacred Books alone had he
been wont to accord such honor and reverence
as firmly to believe that none of their writers
had ever fallen into any error; and that consequently,
if in the said books he came across anything
which seemed to run counter to the truth, he
did not think that that was really the case,
but either that his copy was defective or that
the translator had made a mistake, or again,
that he himself had failed to understand. He
continues:
Nor do I deem that you think otherwise. Indeed,
I absolutely decline to think that you would
have people read your own books in the same
way as they read those of the Prophets and Apostles;
the idea that these latter could contain any
errors is impious.[41]
16. St. Jerome's teaching on this point
serves to confirm and illustrate what our predecessor
of happy memory, Leo XIII, declared to be the
ancient and traditional belief of the Church
touching the absolute immunity of Scripture
from error:
So far is it from being the case that error
can be compatible with inspiration, that, on
the contrary, it not only of its very nature
precludes the presence of error, but as necessarily
excludes it and forbids it as God, the Supreme
Truth, necessarily cannot be the Author of error.
17. Then, after giving the definitions
of the Councils of Florence and Trent, confirmed
by the Council of the Vatican, Pope Leo continues:
Consequently it is not to the point to suggest
that the Holy Spirit used men as His instruments
for writing, and that therefore, while no error
is referable to the primary Author, it may well
be due to the inspired authors themselves. For
by supernatural power the Holy Spirit so stirred
them and moved them to write, so assisted them
as they wrote, that their minds could rightly
conceive only those and all those things which
He himself bade them conceive; only such things
could they faithfully commit to writing and
aptly express with unerring truth; else God
would not be the Author of the entirety of Sacred
Scripture.[42]
18. But although these words of our
predecessor leave no room for doubt or dispute,
it grieves us to find that not only men outside,
but even children of the Catholic Church - nay,
what is a peculiar sorrow to us, even clerics
and professors of sacred learning - who in their
own conceit either openly repudiate or at least
attack in secret the Church's teaching on this
point.
We warmly commend, of course, those who, with
the assistance of critical methods, seek to
discover new ways of explaining the difficulties
in Holy Scripture, whether for their own guidance
or to help others. But we remind them that they
will only come to miserable grief if they neglect
our predecessor's injunctions and overstep the
limits set by the Fathers.
19. Yet no one can pretend that certain
recent writers really adhere to these limitations.
For while conceding that inspiration extends
to every phrase - and, indeed, to every single
word of Scripture - yet, by endeavoring to distinguish
between what they style the primary or religious
and the secondary or profane element in the
Bible, they claim that the effect of inspiration
- namely, absolute truth and immunity from error
- are to be restricted to that primary or religious
element. Their notion is that only what concerns
religion is intended and taught by God in Scripture,
and that all the rest - things concerning "profane
knowledge," the garments in which Divine
truth is presented - God merely permits, and
even leaves to the individual author's greater
or less knowledge. Small wonder, then, that
in their view a considerable number of things
occur in the Bible touching physical science,
history and the like, which cannot be reconciled
with modern progress in science!
20. Some even maintain that these views
do not conflict with what our predecessor laid
down since - so they claim - he said that the
sacred writers spoke in accordance with the
external - and thus deceptive - appearance of
things in nature. But the Pontiff's own words
show that this is a rash and false deduction.
For sound philosophy teaches that the senses
can never be deceived as regards their own proper
and immediate object. Therefore, from the merely
external appearance of things - of which, of
course, we have always to take account as Leo
XIII, following in the footsteps of St. Augustine
and St. Thomas, most wisely remarks - we can
never conclude that there is any error in Sacred
Scripture.
21. Moreover, our predecessor, sweeping
aside all such distinctions between what these
critics are pleased to call primary and secondary
elements, says in no ambiguous fashion that
"those who fancy that when it is a question
of the truth of certain expressions we have
not got to consider so much what God said as
why He said it," are very far indeed from
the truth. He also teaches that Divine inspiration
extends to every part of the Bible without the
slightest exception, and that no error can occur
in the inspired text: "It would be wholly
impious to limit inspiration to certain portions
only of Scripture or to concede that the sacred
authors themselves could have erred."[43]
22. Those, too, who hold that the historical
portions of Scripture do not rest on the absolute
truth of the facts but merely upon what they
are pleased to term their relative truth, namely,
what people then commonly thought, are - no
less than are the aforementioned critics - out
of harmony with the Church's teaching, which
is endorsed by the testimony of Jerome and other
Fathers. Yet they are not afraid to deduce such
views from the words of Leo XIII on the ground
that he allowed that the principles he had laid
down touching the things of nature could be
applied to historical things as well. Hence
they maintain that precisely as the sacred writers
spoke of physical things according to appearance,
so, too, while ignorant of the facts, they narrated
them in accordance with general opinion or even
on baseless evidence; neither do they tell us
the sources whence they derived their knowledge,
nor do they make other peoples' narrative their
own. Such views are clearly false, and constitute
a calumny on our predecessor. After all, what
analogy is there between physics and history?
For whereas physics is concerned with "sensible
appearances" and must consequently square
with phenomena, history on the contrary, must
square with the facts, since history is the
written account of events as they actually occurred.
If we were to accept such views, how could we
maintain the truth insisted on throughout Leo
XIII's Encyclical - viz. that the sacred narrative
is absolutely free from error?
23. And if Leo XIII does say that we
can apply to history and cognate subjects the
same principles which hold good for science,
he yet does not lay this down as a universal
law, but simply says that we can apply a like
line of argument when refuting the fallacies
of adversaries and defending the historical
truth of Scripture from their assaults.
24. Nor do modern innovators stop here:
they even try to claim St. Jerome as a patron
of their views on the ground that he maintained
that historic truth and sequence were not observed
in the Bible, "precisely as things actually
took place, but in accordance with what men
thought at that time," and that he even
held that this was the true norm for history.[44]
A strange distortion of St. Jerome's words!
He does not say that when giving us an account
of events the writer was ignorant of the truth
and simply adopted the false views then current;
he merely says that in giving names to persons
or things he followed general custom. Thus the
Evangelist calls St. Joseph the father of Jesus,
but what he meant by the title "father"
here is abundantly clear from the whole context.
For St. Jerome "the true norm of history"
is this: when it is question of such appellatives
(as "father," etc), and when there
is no danger or error, then a writer must adopt
the ordinary forms of speech simply because
such forms of speech are in ordinary use. More
than this: Jerome maintains that belief in the
Biblical narrative is as necessary to salvation
as is belief in the doctrines of the faith;
thus in his Commentary on the Epistle to Philemon
he says:
"What I mean is this: Does any man believe
in God the Creator? He cannot do so unless he
first believe that the things written of God's
Saints are true." He then gives examples
from the Old Testament, and adds: "Now
unless a man believes all these and other things
too which are written of the Saints he cannot
believe in the God of the Saints."[45]
25. Thus St. Jerome is in complete agreement
with St. Augustine, who sums up the general
belief of Christian antiquity when he says:
Holy Scripture is invested with supreme authority
by reason of its sure and momentous teachings
regarding the faith. Whatever, then, it tells
us of Enoch, Elias and Moses - that we believe.
We do not, for instance, believe that God's
Son was born of the Virgin Mary simply because
He could not otherwise have appeared in the
flesh and 'walked amongst men' - as Faustus
would have it - but we believe it simply because
it is written in Scripture; and unless we believe
in Scripture we can neither be Christians nor
be saved.[46]
26. Then there are other assailants
of Holy Scripture who misuse principles - which
are only sound, if kept within due bounds -
in order to overturn the fundamental truth of
the Bible and thus destroy Catholic teaching
handed down by the Fathers. If Jerome were living
now he would sharpen his keenest controversial
weapons against people who set aside what is
the mind and judgment of the Church, and take
too ready a refuge in such notions as "implicit
quotations" or "pseudo-historical
narratives," or in "kinds of literature"
in the Bible such as cannot be reconciled with
the entire and perfect truth of God's word,
or who suggest such origins of the Bible as
must inevitably weaken - if not destroy - its
authority.
27. What can we say of men who in expounding
the very Gospels so whittle away the human trust
we should repose in it as to overturn Divine
faith in it? They refuse to allow that the things
which Christ said or did have come down to us
unchanged and entire through witnesses who carefully
committed to writing what they themselves had
seen or heard. They maintain - and particularly
in their treatment of the Fourth Gospel - that
much is due of course to the Evangelists - who,
however, added much from their own imaginations;
but much, too, is due to narratives compiled
by the faithful at other periods, the result,
of course, being that the twin streams now flowing
in the same channel cannot be distinguished
from one another. Not thus did Jerome and Augustine
and the other Doctors of the Church understand
the historical trustworthiness of the Gospels;
yet of it one wrote: "He who saw it has
borne witness, and his witness is true; and
he knows that he tells the truth, and you also
may believe" (Jn. 19:35). So, too, St.
Jerome: after rebuking the heretical framers
of the apocryphal Gospels for "attempting
rather to fill up the story than to tell it
truly,"[47] he says of the Canonical Scriptures:
"None can doubt but that what is written
took place."[48] Here again he is in fullest
harmony with Augustine, who so beautifully says:
"These things are true; they are faithfully
and truthfully written of Christ; so that whosoever
believes His Gospel may be thereby instructed
in the truth and misled by no lie."[49]
28. All this shows us how earnestly
we must strive to avoid, as children of the
Church, this insane freedom in ventilating opinions
which the Fathers were careful to shun. This
we shall more readily achieve if you, Venerable
Brethren, will make both clergy and laity committed
to your care by the Holy Spirit realize that
neither Jerome nor the other Fathers of the
Church learned their doctrine touching Holy
Scripture save in the school of the Divine Master
Himself. We know what He felt about Holy Scripture:
when He said, "It is written," and
"the Scripture must needs be fulfilled,"
we have therein an argument which admits of
no exception and which should put an end to
all controversy.
29. Yet it is worthwhile dwelling on
this point a little: when Christ preached to
the people, whether on the Mount by the lakeside,
or in the synagogue at Nazareth, or in His own
city of Capharnaum, He took His points and His
arguments from the Bible. From the same source
came His weapons when disputing with the Scribes
and Pharisees. Whether teaching or disputing
He quotes from all parts of Scripture and takes
His example from it; He quotes it as an argument
which must be accepted. He refers without any
discrimination of sources to the stories of
Jonas and the Ninivites, of the Queen of Sheba
and Solomon, of Elias and Eliseus, of David
and of Noe, of Lot and the Sodomites, and even
of Lot's wife. (cf. Mt. 12:3, 39-42; Lk. 17:26-29,
32). How solemn His witness to the truth of
the sacred books: "One jot, or one tittle
shall not pass of the Law till all be fulfilled"
(Mt. 5:18); and again: "The Scripture cannot
be broken" (Jn. 10:35); and consequently:
"He therefore that shall break one of these
least commandments, and shall so teach men shall
be called the least in the kingdom of heaven"
(Mt. 5:19). Before His Ascension, too, when
He would steep His Apostles in the same doctrine:
"He opened their understanding that they
might understand the Scriptures. And He said
to them: thus it is written, and thus it behoved
Christ to suffer, and to rise again from the
dead the third day" (Lk. 24:45).
30. In a word, then: Jerome's teaching
on the superexcellence and truth of Scripture
is Christ's teaching. Wherefore we exhort all
the Church's children, and especially those
whose duty it is to teach in seminaries, to
follow closely in St. Jerome's footsteps. If
they will but do so they will learn to prize
as he prized the treasure of the Scriptures,
and will derive from them most abundant and
blessed fruit.
31. Now, if we make use of the "Greatest
of Doctors" as our guide and teacher we
shall derive from so doing not only the gains
signalized above, but others too, which cannot
be regarded as trifling or few. What these gains
are, Venerable Brethren, we will set out briefly.
At the outset, then, we are deeply impressed
by the intense love of the Bible which St. Jerome
exhibits in his whole life and teaching: both
are steeped in the Spirit of God. This intense
love of the Bible he was ever striving to kindle
in the hearts of the faithful, and his words
on this subject to the maiden Demetrias are
really addressed to us all: "Love the Bible
and wisdom will love you; love it and it will
preserve you; honor it and it will embrace you;
these are the jewels which you should wear on
your breast and in your ears."[50]
32. His unceasing reading of the Bible
and his painstaking study of each book - nay,
of every phrase and word - gave him a knowledge
of the text such as no other ecclesiastical
writer of old possessed. It is due to this familiarity
with the text and to his own acute judgment
that the Vulgate version Jerome made is, in
the judgment of all capable men, preferable
to any other ancient version, since it appears
to give us the sense of the original more accurately
and with greater elegance than they. The said
Vulgate, "approved by so many centuries
of use in the Church" was pronounced by
the Council of Trent "authentic,"
and the same Council insisted that it was to
be used in teaching and in the liturgy.[51]
If God in His mercy grants us life, we sincerely
hope to see an amended and faithfully restored
edition. We have no doubt that when this arduous
task - entrusted by our predecessor, Pius X,
to the Benedictine Order - has been completed
it will prove of great assistance in the study
of the Bible.
33. But to return to St. Jerome's love
of the Bible: this is so conspicuous in his
letters that they almost seem woven out of Scripture
texts; and, as St. Bernard found no taste in
things which did not echo the most sweet Name
of Jesus, so no literature made any appeal to
Jerome unless it derived its light from Holy
Scripture. Thus he wrote to Paulinus, formerly
senator and even consul, and only recently converted
to the faith:
If only you had this foundation (knowledge of
Scripture); nay, more - if you would let Scripture
give the finishing touches to your work - I
should find nothing more beautiful, more learned,
even nothing more Latin than your volumes. .
. If you could but add to your wisdom and eloquence
study of and real acquaintance with Holy Scripture,
we should speedily have to acknowledge you a
leader amongst us.[52]
34. How we are to seek for this great
treasure, given as it is by our Father in heaven
for our solace during this earthly pilgrimage,
St. Jerome's example shows us. First, we must
be well prepared and must possess a good will.
Thus Jerome himself, immediately on his baptism,
determined to remove whatever might prove a
hindrance to his ambitions in this respect.
Like the men who found a treasure and "for
joy thereof went and sold all that he had and
bought that field" (Mt. 13:44), so did
Jerome say farewell to the idle pleasures of
this passing world; he went into the desert,
and since he realized what risks he had run
in the past through the allurements of vice,
he adopted a most severe style of life. With
all obstacles thus removed he prepared his soul
for "the knowledge of Jesus Christ"
and for putting on Him Who was "meek and
humble of heart." But he went through what
Augustine also experienced when he took up the
study of Scripture. For the latter has told
us how, steeped as a youth in Cicero and profane
authors, the Bible seemed to him unfit to be
compared with Cicero.
My swelling pride shrank from its modest garb,
while my gaze could not pierce to what the latter
hid. Of a truth Scripture was meant to grow
up with the childlike; but then I could not
be childlike; turgid eloquence appealed mightily
to me.[53]
So, too, St. Jerome; even though withdrawn
into the desert he still found such delight
in profane literature that at first he failed
to discern the lowly Christ in His lowly Scriptures:
Wretch that I was! I read Cicero even before
I broke my fast! And after the long night-watches,
when memory of my past sins wrung tears from
my soul, even then I took up my Plautus! Then
perhaps I would come to my senses and would
start reading the Prophets. But their uncouth
language made me shiver, and, since blind eyes
do not see the light, I blamed the sun and not
my own eyes.[54]
35. But in a brief space Jerome became
so enamored of the "folly of the Cross"
that he himself serves as a proof of the extent
to which a humble and devout frame of mind is
conducive to the understanding of Holy Scripture.
He realized that "in expounding Scripture
we need God's Holy Spirit";[55] he saw
that one cannot otherwise read or understand
it "than the Holy Spirit by Whom it was
written demands."[56] Consequently, he
was ever humbly praying for God's assistance
and for the light of the Holy Spirit, and asking
his friends to do the same for him. We find
him commending to the Divine assistance and
to his brethren's prayers his Commentaries on
various books as he began them, and then rendering
God due thanks when completed.
36. As he trusted to God's grace, so
too did he rely upon the authority of his predecessors:
"What I have learned I did not teach myself
- a wretchedly presumptous teacher! - but I
learned it from illustrious men in the Church."[57]
Again: "In studying Scripture I never trusted
to myself."[58] To Theophilus, Bishop of
Alexandria, he imparted the rule he had laid
down for his own student life: "It has
always been my custom to fight for the prerogatives
of a Christian, not to overpass the limits set
by the Fathers, always to bear in mind that
Roman faith praised by the Apostle."[59]
37. He ever paid submissive homage to
the Church, our supreme teacher through the
Roman Pontiffs. Thus, with a view to putting
an end to the controversy raging in the East
concerning the mystery of the Holy Trinity,
he submitted the question to the Roman See for
settlement, and wrote from the Syrian desert
to Pope Damasus as follows:
I decided, therefore, to consult the Chair of
Peter and that Roman faith which the Apostle
praised; I ask for my soul's food from that
city wherein I first put on the garment of Christ.
. .I, who follow no other leader save Christ,
associate myself with Your Blessedness, in communion,
that is, with the Chair of Peter. For I know
the Church was built upon that Rock. . . I beg
you to settle this dispute. If you desire it
I shall not be afraid to say there are Three
Hypostases. If it is your wish let them draw
up a Symbol of faith subsequent to that of Nicaea,
and let us orthodox praise God in the same form
of words as the Arians employ.[60]
38. And in his next letter: "Meanwhile
I keep crying out, 'Any man who is joined to
Peter's Chair, he is my man'."[61] Since
he had learnt this "rule of faith"
from his study of the Bible, he was able to
refute a false interpretation of a Biblical
text with the simple remark: "Yes, but
the Church of God does not admit that."[62]
When, again, Vigilantius quoted an Apocryphal
book, Jerome was content to reply: "A book
I have never so much as read! For what is the
good of soiling one's hands with a book the
Church does not receive?"[63] With his
strong insistence on adhering to the integrity
of the faith, it is not to be wondered at that
he attacked vehemently those who left the Church;
he promptly regarded them as his own personal
enemies. "To put it briefly," he says,
"I have never spared heretics, and have
always striven to regard the Church's enemies
as my own."[64] To Rufinus he writes: "There
is one point in which I cannot agree with you:
you ask me to spare heretics - or, in other
words - not to prove myself a Catholic."[65]
Yet at the same time Jerome deplored the lamentable
state of heretics, and adjured them to return
to their sorrowing Mother, the one source of
salvation;[66] he prayed, too, with all earnestness
for the conversion of those "who had quitted
the Church and put away the Holy Spirit's teaching
to follow their own notions."[67]
39. Was there ever a time, Venerable
Brethren, when there was greater call than now
for us all, lay and cleric alike, to imbibe
the spirit of this "Greatest of Doctors"?
For there are many contumacious folk now who
sneer at the authority and government of God,
Who has revealed Himself, and of the Church
which teaches. You know - for Leo XIII warned
us - "how insistently men fight against
us; You know the arms and arts they rely upon."[68]
It is your duty, then, to train as many really
fit defenders of this holiest of causes as you
can. They must be ready to combat not only those
who deny the existence of the Supernatural Order
altogether, and are thus led to deny the existence
of any divine revelation or inspiration, but
those, too, who - through an itching desire
for novelty - venture to interpret the sacred
books as though they were of purely human origin;
Those, too, who scoff at opinions held of old
in the Church, or who, through contempt of its
teaching office, either reck little of, or silently
disregard, or at least obstinately endeavor
to adapt to their own views, the Constitutions
of the Apostolic See or the decisions of the
Pontifical Biblical Commission.
Would that all Catholics would cling to St.
Jerome's golden rule and obediently listen to
their Mother's words, so as modestly to keep
within the bounds marked out by the Fathers
and ratified by the Church.
40. To return, however, to the question
of the formation of Biblical students. We must
lay the foundations in piety and humility of
mind; only when we have done that does St. Jerome
invite us to study the Bible. In the first place,
he insists, in season and out, on daily reading
of the text. "Provided," he says,
"our bodies are not the slaves of sin,
wisdom will come to us; but exercise your mind,
feed it daily with Holy Scripture."[69]
And again: "We have got, then, to read
Holy Scripture assiduously; we have got to meditate
on the Law of God day and night so that, as
expert money-changers, we may be able to detect
false coin from true."[70]
41. For matrons and maidens alike he
lays down the same rule. Thus, writing to the
Roman matron Laeta about her daughter's training,
he says:
Every day she should give you a definite account
of her Bible-reading . . .For her the Bible
must take the place of silks and jewels . .
. Let her learn the Psalter first, and find
her recreation in its songs; let her learn from
Solomon's Proverbs the way of life, from Ecclesiastes
how to trample on the world. In Job she will
find an example of patient virtue. Thence let
her pass to the Gospels; they should always
be in her hands. She should steep herself in
the Acts and the Epistles. And when she has
enriched her soul with these treasures she should
commit to memory the Prophets, the Heptateuch,
Kings and Chronicles, Esdras and Esther: then
she can learn the Canticle of Canticles without
any fear."[71]
42. He says the same to Eustochium:
"Read assiduously and learn as much as
you can. Let sleep find you holding your Bible,
and when your head nods let it be resting on
the sacred page."[72]
When he sent Eustochium the epitaph he had
composed for her mother Paula, he especially
praised that holy woman for having so wholeheartedly
devoted herself and her daughter to Bible study
that she knew the Bible through and through,
and had committed it to memory. He continues:
I will tell you another thing about her, though
evil-disposed people may cavil at it: she determined
to learn Hebrew, a language which I myself,
with immense labor and toil from my youth upwards,
have only partly learned, and which I even now
dare not cease studying lest it should quit
me. But Paula learned it, and so well that she
could chant the Psalms in Hebrew, and could
speak it, too, without any trace of a Latin
accent. We can see the same thing even now in
her daughter Eustochium.[73]
43. He tells us much the same of Marcella,
who also knew the Bible exceedingly well.[74]
And none can fail to see what profit and sweet
tranquillity must result in well-disposed souls
from such devout reading of the Bible. Whosoever
comes to it in piety, faith and humility, and
with determination to make progress in it, will
assuredly find therein and will eat the "Bread
that cometh down from heaven" (Jn. 6:33);
he will, in his own person, experience the truth
of David's words: "The hidden and uncertain
things of Thy Wisdom Thou hast made manifest
to me!" (Ps. 50:8), for this table of the
"Divine Word" does really "contain
holy teaching, teach the true faith, and lead
us unfalteringly beyond the veil into the Holy
of Holies."[75]
Hence, as far as in us lies, we, Venerable
Brethren, shall, with St. Jerome as our guide,
never desist from urging the faithful to read
daily the Gospels, the Acts and the Epistles,
so as to gather thence food for their souls.
44. Our thoughts naturally turn just
now to the Society of St. Jerome, which we ourselves
were instrumental in founding; its success has
gladdened us, and we trust that the future will
see a great impulse given to it.
The object of this Society is to put into the
hands of as many people as possible the Gospels
and Acts, so that every Christian family may
have them and become accustomed to reading them.
This we have much at heart, for we have seen
how useful it is. We earnestly hope, then, that
similar Societies will be founded in your dioceses
and affiliated to the parent Society here.
Commendation, too, is due to Catholics in other
countries who have published the entire New
Testament, as well as selected portions of the
Old, in neat and simple form so as to popularize
their use. Much again must accrue to the Church
of God when numbers of people thus approach
this table of heavenly instruction which the
Lord provided through the ministry of His Prophets,
Apostles and Doctors for the entire Christian
world.
45. If, then, St. Jerome begs for assiduous
reading of the Bible by the faithful in general,
he insists on it for those who are called to
"bear the yoke of Christ" and preach
His word. His words to Rusticus the monk apply
to all clerics:
So long as you are in your own country regard
you cell as your orchard; there you can gather
Scripture's various fruits and enjoy the pleasures
it affords you. Always have a book in your hands
and read it; learn the Psalter by heart; pray
unceasingly; watch over your senses lest idle
thoughts creep in.[76] Similarly to Nepotian:
Constantly read the Bible; in fact, have it
always in your hands. Learn what you have got
to teach. Get firm hold of that "faithful
word that is according to doctrine, that you
may be able to exhort in sound doctrine and
convince the gainsayers."[77]
When reminding Paulinus of the lessons St.
Paul gave to Timothy and Titus, and which he
himself had derived from the Bible, Jerome says:
A mere holy rusticity only avails the man himself;
but however much a life so meritorious may serve
to build up the Church of God, it does as much
harm to the Church if it fails to "resist
the gainsayer." Malachias the Prophet says,
or rather the Lord says it by Malachias: "Ask
for the Law from the priests." For it is
the priest's duty to give an answer when asked
about the Law. In Deuteronomy we read: "Ask
thy father and he will tell thee; ask the priests
and they will tell thee. . ." Daniel, too,
at the close of his glorious vision, declares
that "the just shall shine like stars and
they that are learned as the brightness of the
firmament." What a vast difference, then,
between a righteous rusticity and a learned
righteousness! The former likened to the stars;
the latter to the heavens themselves![78]
He writes ironically to Marcella about the
"self-righteous lack of education"
noticeable in some clerics, who "think
that to be without culture and to be holy are
the same thing, and who dub themselves 'disciples
of the fisherman'; as though they were holy
simply because ignorant!"[79]
Nor is it only the "uncultured" whom
Jerome condemns. Learned clerics sin through
ignorance of the Bible; therefore he demands
of them an assiduous reading of the text.
46. Strive, then, Venerable Brethren,
to bring home to your clerics and priests these
teachings of the Sainted Commentator. You have
to remind them constantly of the demands made
by their divine vocation if they would be worthy
of it: "The lips of the priest shall keep
knowledge, and men shall ask the Law at his
mouth, for he is the Angel of the Lord of hosts"
(Mal. 2:7). They must realize, then, that they
cannot neglect study of the Bible, and that
this can only be undertaken along the lines
laid down by Leo XIII in his Encyclical Providentissimus
Deus.[80] They cannot do this better than by
frequenting the Biblical Institute established
by our predecessor, Pius X, in accordance with
the wishes of Leo XIII. As the experience of
the past ten years has shown, it has proved
a great gain to the Church. Not all, however,
can avail themselves of this. It will be well,
then, Venerable Brethren, that picked men, both
of the secular and regular clergy, should come
to Rome for Biblical study. All will not come
with the same object. Some, in accordance with
the real purpose of the Institute, will so devote
themselves to Biblical study that "afterwards,
both in private and in public, whether by writing
or by teaching, whether as professors in Catholic
schools or by writing in defense of Catholic
truth, they may be able worthily to uphold the
cause of Biblical study.<<<<<<<<<<"
Others, however, already priests, will obtain
here a wider knowledge of the Bible than they
were able to acquire during their theological
course; they will gain, too, an acquaintance
with the great commentators and with Biblical
history and geography. Such knowledge will avail
them much in their ministry; they will be "instructed
to every good work."[81]
47. We learn, then, from St. Jerome's
example and teaching the qualities required
in one who would devote himself to Biblical
study. But what, in his view, is the goal of
such study? First, that from the Bible's pages
we learn spiritual perfection. Meditating as
he did day and night on the Law of the Lord
and on His Scriptures, Jerome himself found
there the "Bread that cometh down from
heaven," the manna containing all delights.[82]
And we certainly cannot do without that bread.
How can a cleric teach others the way of salvation
if through neglect of meditation on God's word
he fails to teach himself? What confidence can
he have that, when ministering to others, he
is really "a leader of the blind, a light
to them that are in darkness, an instructor
of the foolish, having the form of knowledge
and of truth in the law," if he is unwilling
to study the said Law and thus shuts the door
on any divine illumination on it?
Alas! many of God's ministers, through never
looking at their Bible, perish themselves and
allow many others to perish also. "The
children have asked for bread, and there was
none to break it unto them" (Lam. 4:4);
and "With desolation is all the land made
desolate, for there is none than meditateth
in the heart" (Jer. 12:11).
48. Secondly, it is from the Bible that
we gather confirmations and illustrations of
any particular doctrine we wish to defend. In
this Jerome was marvelously expert. When disputing
with the heretics of his day he refuted them
by singularly apt and weighty arguments drawn
from the Bible. If men of the present age would
but imitate him in this we should see realized
what our predecessor, Leo XIII, in his Encyclical,
Providentissimus Deus, said was so eminently
desirable: "The Bible influencing our theological
teaching and indeed becoming its very soul."[83]
49. Lastly, the real value of the Bible
is for our preaching - if the latter is to be
fruitful. On this point it is a pleasure to
illustrate from Jerome what we ourselves said
in our Encyclical on "preaching the Word
of God," entitled Humani generis. How insistently
Jerome urges on priests assiduous reading of
the Bible if they would worthily teach and preach!
Their words will have neither value nor weight
nor any power to touch men's souls save in proportion
as they are "informed" by Holy Scripture:
"Let a priest's speech be seasoned with
the Bible,"[84] for "the Scriptures
are a trumpet that stirs us with a mighty voice
and penetrates to the soul of them that believe,"[85]
and "nothing so strikes home as an example
taken from the Bible."[86]
50. These mainly concern the exegetes,
yet preachers, too, must always bear them in
mind. Jerome's first rule is careful study of
the actual words so that we may be perfectly
certain what the writer really does say. He
was most careful to consult the original text,
to compare various versions, and, if he discovered
any mistake in them, to explain it and thus
make the text perfectly clear. The precise meaning,
too, that attaches to particular words has to
be worked out, for "when discussing Holy
Scripture it is not words we want so much as
the meaning of words."[87] We do not for
a moment deny that Jerome, in imitation of Latin
and Greek doctors before him, leaned too much,
especially at the outset, towards allegorical
interpretations. But his love of the Bible,
his unceasing toil in reading and re-reading
it and weighing its meaning, compelled him to
an ever-growing appreciation of its literal
sense and to the 88 formulation of sound principles
regarding it. These we set down here, for they
provide a safe path for us all to follow in
getting from the Sacred Books their full meaning.
In the first place, then, we must study the
literal or historical meaning:
I earnestly warn the prudent reader not to pay
attention to superstitious interpretations such
as are given cut and dried according to some
interpreter's fancy. He should study the beginning,
middle, and end, and so form a connected idea
of the whole of what he finds written.[88]
51. Jerome then goes on to say that
all interpretation rests on the literal sense,[89]
and that we are not to think that there is no
literal sense merely because a thing is said
metaphorically, for "the history itself
is often presented in metaphorical dress and
described figuratively."[90] Indeed, he
himself affords the best refutation of those
who maintain that he says that certain passages
have no historical meaning: "We are not
rejecting the history, we are merely giving
a spiritual interpretation of it.''[91] Once,
however, he has firmly established the literal
or historical meaning, Jerome goes on to seek
our deeper and hidden meanings, as to nourish
his mind with more delicate food. Thus he says
of the Book of Proverbs - and he makes the same
remark about other parts of the Bible - that
we must not stop at the simple literal sense:
"Just as we have to seek gold in the earth,
for the kernel in the shell, for the chestnut's
hidden fruit beneath its hairy coverings, so
in Holy Scripture we have to dig deep for its
divine meaning."[92]
52. When teaching Paulinus "how
to make true progress in the Bible," he
says: "Everything we read in the Sacred
Books shines and glitters even in its outer
shell; but the marrow of it is sweeter. If you
want the kernel you must break the shell."[93]
At the same time, he insists that in searching
for this deeper meaning we must proceed in due
order, "lest in our search for spiritual
riches we seem to despise the history as poverty-stricken."[94]
Consequently he repudiates many mystical interpretations
alleged by ancient writers; for he feels that
they are not sufficiently based on the literal
meaning:
When all these promises of which the Prophets
sang are regarded not merely as empty sounds
or idle tropological expressions, but as established
on earth and having solid historical foundations,
then, can we put on them the coping-stone of
a spiritual interpretation.[95]
53. On this point he makes the wise
remark that we ought not to desert the path
mapped out by Christ and His Apostles, who,
while regarding the Old Testament as preparing
for and foreshadowing the New Covenant, and
whilst consequently explaining various passages
in the former as figurative, yet do not give
a figurative interpretation of all alike. In
confirmation of this he often refers us to St.
Paul, who, when "explaining the mystery
of Adam and Eve, did not deny that they were
formed, but on that historical basis erected
a spiritual interpretation, and said: 'Therefore
shall a man leave,' etc."[96]
54. If only Biblical students and preachers
would but follow this example of Christ and
His Apostles; if they would but obey the directions
of Leo XIII, and not neglect "those allegorical
or similar explanations which the Fathers have
given, especially when these are based on the
literal sense, and are supported by weighty
authority";[97] if they would pass from
the literal to the more profound meaning in
temperate fashion, and thus lift themselves
to a higher plane, they would, with St. Jerome,
realize how true are St. Paul's words: "All
Scripture is inspired by God and useful for
teaching, for reproving, for correcting, for
instructing in justice" (2 Tim. 3: 16).
They would, too, derive abundant help from
the infinite treasury of facts and ideas in
the Bible, and would thence be able to mold
firmly but gently the lives and characters of
the faithful.
55. As for methods of expounding Holy
Scripture - "for amongst the dispensers
of the mysteries of God it is required that
a man be found faithful" - St. Jerome lays
down that we have got to keep to the "true
interpretation, and that the real function of
a commentator is to set forth not what he himself
would like his author to mean, but what he really
does mean."[98]
And he continues: "It is dangerous to
speak in the Church, lest through some faulty
interpretation we make Christ's Gospel into
man's Gospel."[99] And again: "In
explaining the Bible we need no florid oratorical
composition, but that learned simplicity which
is truth."[100]
This ideal he ever kept before him; he acknowledges
that in his Commentaries he "seeks no praise,
but so to set out what another has well said
that it may be understood in the sense in which
it was said."[101] He further demands of
an expositor of Scripture a style which, "while
leaving no impression of haziness. . .yet explains
things, sets out the meaning, clears up obscurities,
and is not mere verbiage."[102]
56. And here we may set down some passages
from his writings which will serve to show to
what an extent he shrank from that declamatory
kind of eloquence which simply aims at winning
empty applause by an equally empty and noisy
flow of words. He says to Nepotian:
I do not want you to be a declaimer or a garrulous
brawler; rather be skilled in the Mysteries,
learned in the Sacraments of God. To make the
populace gape by spinning words and speaking
like a whirlwind is only worthy of empty-headed
men.[103]
And once more:
Students ordained at this time seem not to think
how they may get at the real marrow of Holy
Scripture, but how best they may make peoples'
ears tingle by their flowery declamations![104]
Again:
I prefer to say nothing of men who, like myself,
have passed from profane literature to Biblical
study, but who, if they happen once to have
caught men's ears by their ornate sermons, straightway
begin to fancy that whatsoever they say is God's
law. Apparently they do not think it worth while
to discover what the Prophets and Apostles really
meant; they are content to string together texts
made to fit the meaning they want. One would
almost fancy that instead of being a degraded
species of oratory, it must be a fine thing
to pervert the meaning of the text and compel
the reluctant Scripture to yield the meaning
one wants![105]
57. "As a matter of fact, mere
loquacity would not win any credit unless backed
by Scriptural authority, that is, when men see
that the speaker is trying to give his false
doctrine Biblical support" (Tit. 1:10).
Moreover, this garrulous eloquence and wordy
rusticity "lacks biting power, has nothing
vivid or life-giving in it; it is flaccid, languid
and enervated; it is like boiled herbs and grass,
which speedily dry up and wither away."[106]
On the contrary the Gospel teaching is straightforward,
it is like that "least of all seeds"
- the mustard seed - "no mere vegetable,
but something that 'grows into a tree so that
the birds of the air come and dwell in its branches'."[107]
The consequence is that everybody hears gladly
this simple and holy fashion of speech, for
it is clear and has real beauty without artificiality:
There are certain eloquent folk who puff out
their cheeks and produce a foaming torrent of
words; may they win all the eulogiums they crave
for! For myself, I prefer so to speak that I
may be intelligible; when I discuss the Bible
I prefer the Bible's simplicity[108]. . . A
cleric's expositio