THE TRIPLE CROWN
OR TIARA
THE POPE'S OFFICIAL HEADDRESS
To All the Patriarchs, Primates, Archbishops,
Bishops, and Ordinaries in Union with the
Apostolic See
Since the Holy Ghost, 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 shoud be to develop that Treasure and so provide for the faithful plenteous "consolation from the Scriptures." 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 Centerary 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 Predecesors, 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," a"Teacher of Catholics," "model of virtue, world's Teacher" -- 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.
I. LIFE AND LABORS OF ST. JEROME
No need to remind you, Venerable Brethren, that
Jerome was born in Stridonia, in a town "on the borders of Dalmatia and
Pannonia"; that from his infancy he was brought up a Catholic, that after
his Baptism in Rome 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" 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," 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. 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 Apollinarius of Laodicea; but while
I learned much from him about the Bible, I would never accept his doubtful
teachings about its interpretation.
From Antioch he betook himself to
the desert of Calcia, 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 up in despair, and
yet in my eagerness to learn took it up again! I 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.
Lest, however, he should grow idle in this desert
where there were no heretics to vex him, Jerome betook hiimself 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 wrote
on Isaias' vision of the Serphim. He then returned to Rome on Ecclesiastical
Business, and Pope Damasus admitted him into his court. However,
he let nothing distract him from continual occupation with the Bible, and
the task of copying various manuscripts, as well as answering the many
questions put to him by students of both sexes.
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 grownig 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!
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 his 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 Domino 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.
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 for ever. So it was that, sparing himself neither
labor nor watching nor expense, he continued to extreme old age meditation
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 passes his life at Rome, the Capital of the world.
II. ST. JEROME'S TEACHING REGARDING HOLY SCRIPTURE
1. Plenary Inspiration of Holy Scripture.
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 Ghost -- 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 Ghost; 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 protray and describe for us their individual
character, almost their very feartures; 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 insturments 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."
If we ask how we are to explain this Power and Action
of God, the Principal Cause, on the 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 -- 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" and the "Pearl beyond price,"
since in them are to be found the Riches of Christ and "Silver wherewith
to adorn God's House."
2. Authoritative Character of Holy Scripture. Jerome
also insists on the super-eminent 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.
In the same fashiion 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.
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."
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." 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 adverssaries; 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.
3. Biblical Inerrancy. 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. 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 Ghost.
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 one by this very note
of Truth: "The Lord's Words are True; for Him to say it, means that it
is." Again. "Scripture cannot lie"; it is wrong to say Scripture
lies, nay, it is impious even to admit the very notion of error where the
Bible is concerned. "The Apostles," he says, "are one thing; other
writers' -- that is, profane writers -- "are another;" "the former
always tell the Truth; the latter -- as being mere men -- sometimes
err," and though many things are said in the Bible which seem incredible,
yet they are True; in this "Word of Truth" you cannot find things or statements
which are contradictory, "there is nothing discordant nor conflicting";
consequently, "when Scripture seems to be in conflict with itself both
passages are True despite their diversity."
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." 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.
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.
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 Ghost used men as His Instruments for writing, and that therefore,
while no error is referrable to the Primary Author, it may well be due
to the inspired Authors themselves. For by Supernatural Power the
Holy Ghost 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.
III. MODERN VIEWS COMPARED WITH ST. JEROME'S TEACHING
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.
1. No distinction of Primary and Secondary Elements.
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 of 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!
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.
Moreover, Our Predecessor, sweeping aside all such
distincitions 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 certai 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 errored."
2. No Distinction of Relative and Absolute Truth.
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 are concerned with "sensible appearances"
and must consequently square with phenomena, history on the contrary, must
square with 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?
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.
3. Historical Truth in the Bible. 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. 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 of 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.
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.
4. No "Tacit Quotations." 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.
What can we say of man 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 trust-worthiness
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, that you
also may believe." (Jn. 13:35.) 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," he says of the Canonical
Scriptures: "None can doubt but that what is written took place."
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
Insturcted in the Truth and misled by no lie."
5. Modern Views Incompatible with Tradition and With
Christ's Method. 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 Ghost 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.
Yet it is worth while 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 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 behooved Christ to suffer, and to rise again from
the dead the third day." (Lk. 24:25.)
In a word, then: Jerome's teaching on the super
excellence 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.
(Because of the length of this Encyclical Letter it will be in 2 files. To continue click on CONTINUE below. If you wish to save this Encyclical Letter you will have to save both files.)