A Word on the The Scriptures

Since Scripture is the written word of God. Its contents are divinely guaranteed truths, revealed either in the strict or the wider sense of the word. Since the inspiration of a writing cannot be known without Divine testimony, God must have revealed which are the books that constitute Sacred Scripture. Moreover, theologians teach that Christian Revelation was complete in the Apostles, and that its deposit was entrusted to the Apostles to guard and to promulgate. Hence the apostolic deposit of Revelation contained not merely Sacred Scripture in the abstract, but also the knowledge as to its constituent books. Scripture, then, is an apostolic deposit entrusted to the Church, and to the Church belongs its lawful administration. This position of Sacred Scripture in the Church implies the following understandings:

(1) The Apostles promulgated both the Old and New Testament as a document received from God. It is antecedently probable that God should not cast his written Word upon men as a mere windfall, coming from no known authority, but that he should entrust its publication to the care of those whom he was sending to preach the Gospel to all nations, and with whom he had promised to be for all days, even to the consummation of the world. In conformity with this principle, St. Jerome (De script. eccl.) says of the Gospel of St. Mark: "When Peter had heard it, he both approved of it and ordered it to be read in the churches". The Fathers testify to the promulgation of Scripture by the Apostles where they treat of the transmission of the inspired writings.

(2) The transmission of the inspired writings consists in the delivery of Scripture by the Apostles to their successors with the right, the duty, and the power to continue its promulgation, to preserve its integrity and identity, to explain its meaning, to use it in proving and illustrating Catholic teaching, to oppose and condemn any attack upon its doctrine, or any abuse of its meaning. We may infer all this from the character of the inspired writings and the nature of the Apostolate; but it is also attested by some of the weightiest writers of the early Church. St. Irenaeus insists upon these points against the Gnostics, who appealed to Scripture as to private historical documents. He excludes this Gnostic view, first by insisting on the mission of the Apostles and upon the succession in the Apostolate, especially as seen in the Church of Rome (Haer., III, 3-4); secondly, by showing that the preaching of the Apostles continued by their successors contains a supernatural guarantee of infallibility through the indwelling of the Holy Ghost (Haer., III, 24); thirdly, by combining the Apostolic succession and the supernatural guarantee of the Holy Ghost (Haer., IV, 26). It seems plain that, if Scripture cannot be regarded as a private historical document on account of the official mission of the Apostles, on account of the official succession in the Apostolate of their successors, on account of the assistance of the Holy Spirit promised to the Apostles and their successors, the promulgation of Scripture, the preservation of its integrity and identity, and the explanation of its meaning must belong to the Apostles and their legitimate successors. The same principles are advocated by the great Alexandrian doctor, Origen (De princ., Praef.). "That alone", he says, "is to be believed to be the truth which in nothing differs from the ecclesiastical and apostolic tradition". In another passage (in Matth. tr. XXIX, n. 46-47), he rejects the contention urged by the heretics "as often as they bring forward canonical Scriptures in which every Christian agrees and believes", that "in the houses is the word of truth"; "for from it (the Church) alone the sound hath gone forth into all the earth, and their words unto the ends of the world". That the African Church agrees with the Alexandrian, is clear from the words of Tertullian (De praescript., nn, 15, 19). He protests against the admission of heretics "to any discussion whatever touching the Scriptures". "This question should be first proposed, which is now the only one to be discussed, `To whom belongs the faith itself: whose are the Scriptures'?. . .For the true Scriptures and the true expositions and all the true Christian traditions will be wherever both the true Christian rule and faith shall be shown to be". St. Augustine endorses the same position when he says: "I should not believe the Gospel except on the authority of the Catholic Church" (Con. epist. Manichaei, fundam., n. 6).

(3) By virtue of its official and permanent promulgation, Scripture is a public document, the Divine authority of which is evident to all the members of the Church.

(4) The Church necessarily possesses a text of Scripture, which is internally authentic, or substantially identical with the original. Any form or version of the text, the internal authenticity of which the Church has approved either by its universal and constant use, or by a formal declaration, enjoys the character of external or public authenticity, i.e., its conformity with the original must not merely be presumed juridically, but must be admitted as certain on account of the infallibility of the whole Church.

(5) The authentic text, legitimately promulgated, is a source and rule of faith, though it remains only a means or instrument in the hands of the teaching body of the Church, which alone has the right of authoritatively interpreting Scripture.

(6) The administration and custody of Scripture is not entrusted directly to the whole Church, but to its teaching body, though Scripture itself is the common property of the members of the whole Church. While the private handling of Scripture is opposed to the fact that it is common property, its administrators are bound to communicate its contents to all the members of the Church.

(7) Though Scripture is the property of the Church alone, those outside Her may use it as a means of discovering or entering into the Church. However, as Tertullian shows that they have no right to apply Scripture to their own purposes or to turn it against the Church. He also teaches Christians how to contest the right of heretics to appeal to Scripture at all, before arguing with them on single points of Scriptural doctrine.

(8) The rights of the teaching body of the Church include also that of issuing and enforcing decrees for promoting the right use, or preventing the abuse of Scripture.

Some interesting ideas which refute the BIBLE-ONLY Theory

Did Our Lord write any part of the New Testament or command His Apostles to do so?
Our Lord Himself Never wrote a line, nor is there any record that He ordered his Apostles to write; He did command them to teach and to preach. Also He to Whom all power was given in Heaven and on earth (Matt. 28-18) promised to give them the Holy Spirit (John 14-26) and to be with them Himself till the end of the world. (Matt. 28-20).

2. How many of the Apostles or others actually wrote what is now in the New Testament?
A Few of the Apostles wrote part of Our Lord’s teachings, as they themselves expressly stated; i.e., Peter, Paul, James, John, Jude, Matthew, also Sts. Mark and Luke. None of the others wrote anything, so far as is recorded.

3. Was it a teaching or a Bible-reading Church that Christ founded?
The Protestant Bible expressly states that Christ founded a teaching Church, which existed before any of the new Testament books were written.

Rom. 10-17: So then faith cometh by HEARING, and hearing by the word of God.

Matt. 28-19: Go ye therefore and TEACH all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.

Mark 16-20: And the went forth, and PREACHED everywhere, the Lord working with them, and confirming the word with signs following. Amen.

Mark 16-15: And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and PREACH the gospel to every creature.

4. Was there any drastic difference between what Our Lord commanded the Apostles to teach and what the New Testament contains?
Our Lord commanded his Apostles to teach all things whatsoever He had commanded; (Matt. 28-20); his Church must necessarily teach everything; (John 14-26); however, the Protestant Bible itself teaches that the Bible does not contain all of Our Lord’s doctrines:

John 20-30: And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book, etc.

John 21-25: And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen.

5. Does the New Testament expressly refer to Christ’s “unwritten word”?
The New Testament itself teaches that it does not contain all that Our Lord did or, consequently, all that He taught.

John 20-30: And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book, etc.

6. What became of the unwritten truths which Our Lord and the Apostles taught?
The Church has carefully conserved this “word of mouth” teaching by historical records called Tradition. Even the Protestant Bible teaches that many Christian truths were to be handed down by word of mouth.

2 Thes. 2-15: Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.

2 Tim. 2-2: And the things that thou hast heard of me among many witnesses, the same commit thou to faithful men, who shall be able to teach others also.

7. Between what years were the first and last books of the New Testament written?
The first book, St. Matthew’s Gospel, was not written until about 10 years after Our Lord’s Ascension. St. John’s 4th gospel and Apocalypse or Book of Revelations were not written until about 100 A.D.

8. When was the New Testament placed under one cover?
In 397 A.D. by the Council of Carthage, from which it follows that non-Catholics have derived their New Testament from the Church; no other source was available.

9. Why so much delay in compiling the new Testament?
Prior to 397 A.D., the various books of the New Testament were not under one cover, but were in the custody of different groups or congregations. The persecutions against the Church, which had gained new intensity, prevented these New Testament books from being properly authenticated and placed under one cover. However, this important work was begun after Constantine gave peace to Christianity in 313 A.D., allowing it to be practiced in the Roman Empire.

10. What other problem confronted those who wished to determine the contents of the New Testament?
Before the inspired books were recognized as such, many other books had been written and by many were thought to be inspired; hence the Church made a thorough examination of the whole question; biblical scholars spent years in the Holy Land studying the original languages of the New Testament writings.

11. Who finally did decide which books were inspired and therefore belonged to the New Testament?
Shortly before 400 A.D. a General Council of the Church, finally decided which books really belonged to the New Testament and which did not.

12. Why is it impossible for modern non-Catholics to check over the work done by the Church previous to 400 A.D.?
The original writings were on frail material called papyrus, which had but temporary enduring qualities. While the books judged to be inspired by the Catholic Church were carefully copied by her monks, those rejected at that time were allowed to disintegrate, for lack of further interest in them.

13. Would the theory of private interpretation of the New Testament have been possible for the year 400 A.D.?
No, because, as already stated, no New Testament as such was in existence.

14. Would the private interpretation theory have been possible between 400 A.D. and 1440 A.D., when printing was invented?
No, the cost of individual Bibles written by hand was prohibitive; moreover, due to the scarcity of books, and other reasons, the ability to read was limited to a small minority. The Church used art, drama and other means to convey Biblical messages.

15. Who copied and conserved the Bible during the interval between 400 A.D., and 1440 A.D.?
The monks; in many cases these spent their entire lives to give the world personally-penned copies of the Scriptures, before printing was invented.

16. Since Luther, what consequences have followed from the use of the “Bible-only” theory and its personal interpretation?
Just what St. Paul foretold when he said: “For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears.” (2 Tim. 4-3, Protestant edition).

17. In Christ’s system, what important part has the Bible?
The Bible is one precious source of religious truth; other sources are historical records (Tradition) and the abiding presence of the Holy Spirit.

18. Now that the New Testament is complete and available, what insolvable problem remains?
The impossibility of the Bible to explain itself and the consequent multiplicity of errors which individuals make by their theory of private interpretation. Hence it is indisputable that the Bible must have an authorized interpreter.

2 Peter 1-20: Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.

2 Peter 3-16: As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.

Acts 8-30: And Philip ran thither to him, and heard him read the prophet Esaias, and said, Understandest thou what thou readest? And he said, How can I, except some man should guide me? And he desired Philip that he would come up and sit with him.