New Page 1

And the words of the LORD are flawless, like silver refined in a furnace of clay, purified seven times. (Ps. 12:6)

For the word of the LORD is right and true; he is faithful in all he does. (Ps. 33:4)

By the word of the LORD were the heavens made, their starry host by the breath of his mouth. (Ps. 33:6)

May my tongue sing of your word, for all your commands are righteous. (Ps. 119:172)

“ jEn ajrch/` h\n oJ lovgo~ kai; oJ lovgo~ h\n pro;~ to;n qeovn, kai; qeo;~ h\n oJ lovgo~.”[1] In the beginning was the word, can the word was in the presence of God, and the word was God. (Jn 1:1)[2]

Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the Word of the Father and the Lord of History is the beginning point of the Deposit of Faith Series. He is also the end point, for “All things were made through him, and without there was made not one thing which was made” (Jn 1:3). Christ, “in as much as he is man, is the way for us to reach out to God.”[3]

“It pleased God, in his goodness and wisdom, to reveal himself to make known the mystery of his will. His will was that men should have access to the Father, through Christ, the Word made flesh, in the Holy Spirit, and thus become sharers in the divine nature.”[4]

“After God had spoken in many times and in various ways through the prophets, ‘in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son’ (Heb 1:1-2).”[5] “Christ established on earth the kingdom of God, revealed his Father and himself by deeds and words; and by his death, resurrection and glorious ascension, as well as by sending the Holy Spirit, completed his work. Lifted up from the earth he draws all men to himself (cf. Jn 10:32), for he alone has the words of eternal life (cf. Jn 6:68).”

J. Neuner, S.J. and J. Dupuis, S.J., The Christian Faith : Doctrinal Documents of the Catholic Church.

Assorted Encyclicals, available from many sources, such as the Vatican Library (which is a book store, not a library) or Pauline Books and Media

bible.gospelcom.net, “Bible Gateway,” a highly effective verse and word search, given it’s Protestant limitations (referring mainly to the selection of translations).

The Deposit of Faith series places the discussion of revelation at the very beginning of all the units. In each of the following units, we will contemplate a compendium of Catholic theology referring continually to the scriptures and to Magisterial teaching. To do so without studying what the scriptures essentially are in terms of divine revelation, or without explaining what the Magisterium is, how it acts and why it’s important.

Deposit of Faith. “Guarding the Deposit of Faith is the mission which the Lord entrusted to his Church.”[6] It is the whole of Sacred Scripture and divine tradition.[7] It is an error to assert that, “since the Deposit of Faith contains only revealed truths, the Church has no right to pass judgment on the assertions of the human sciences,”[8] as revelation can contain some truths in it which are otherwise attainable also by means of human science, as, for example, that the soul survives the body. “The apostles entrusted the ‘Sacred deposit’ of the faith (the depositum fidei),[9]contained in Sacred Scripture and Tradition, to the whole Church.”[10]

Magisterium. This Latin term has been assimilated into English with no permutation. It means. “teaching office.” “The task of giving an authentic interpretation of the Word of God, whether in its written form or in the form of Tradition, has been entrusted to the living, teaching office of the Church alone. Its authority in this matter is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ.”[11] This office is exercised by the Bishops in communion with the successor of Peter, and is a service to, not a power over, the Word of God.[12]

Infallibility. “By a ‘supernatural sense of faith,’ the People of God, under the guidance of the Church’s living Magisterium, ‘unfailingly adheres to this faith.’”[13] It is possessed by the Supreme Pontiff (the Pope),[14] the college of bishops in union with him[15] and not by singular bishops taken individually. It was defined and promulgated formally for the first time at Vatican I in 1870, although it has always been an essential element of our faith.

Dogma. The definitive proposition from the Magisterium of a truth contained in divine revelation or of truths having a necessary connection with these, which obliges the Christian people to an irrevocable adherence of faith.[16]

Mystery. In the context of Catholicism, mysteries are those things which have been revealed but whose content can’t be comprehended by the human mind. For example, the mind cannot rationally comprehend, or fully understand, the Holy Trinity. Mysteries aren’t things that we don’t know, they’re things that we do know but exceed the natural object of the human intellect. “If any one say that in Divine Revelation there are contained no mysteries properly so called, but that through reason rightly developed all the dogmas of faith can be understood and demonstrated from natural principles, let him be anathema.”[17]

Inspiration. We refer to the act by which God enlightened the authors of the sacred Scriptures to write down what He willed. This is what we refer to when, in the creed, we profess, “[The Holy Spirit] has spoken through the prophets.” It is not the same as artistic or literary inspiration. “The divinely revealed realities, which are contained and presented in the text of sacred Scripture, have been written down under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.”

“In His goodness and wisdom God chose to reveal Himself and to make known to us the hidden purpose of His will (see Eph. 1:9) by which through Christ, the Word made flesh, man might in the Holy Spirit have access to the Father and come to share in the divine nature (see Eph. 2:18; 2 Peter 1:4). Through this revelation, therefore, the invisible God (see Col. 1;15, 1 Tim. 1:17) out of the abundance of His love speaks to men as friends (see Ex. 33:11; John 15:14-15) and lives among them (see Bar. 3:38), so that He may invite and take them into fellowship with Himself. This plan of revelation is realized by deeds and words having in inner unity.”[18]

The encounter, therefore, with God is an initiative of God’s love. We have a God that speaks to us, unlike Islam, unlike the Greco-roman myths, unlike the Eastern religions.

This encounter happens in history. It happened through the prophets and apostles, through the people of God in the Old Testament and the disciples of the New Testament, and continues to our day. For the Bible isn’t “just another book.” It is God’s word, “living and active, sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart.” (Heb. 4:12). If he speaks, what does he say to me? In the words of Sacred Scripture, we truly hear God’s word.

There were stages: the patriarchal stage, the centuries of the covenants, the gift of the law and of prophecy, and finally the appearance of the Word himself, Jesus Christ, Son of God, Son of Mary. Some of these stages enjoyed some overlapping, of course.

Revelation has a finality, which is love. God loves man for man’s own sake,[19] and wants us to have access to him. We can’t do this, being only creatures made by the hand of God, for reaching God is simply beyond man’s natural powers, and surely too high an expectation to hope from such a sinful creature. Yet he calls us to be friends.

(NB: It is interesting to note that the theology of the “calling” or “vocation” is something completely new, in as much as it is an express teaching, in the history of the ecumenical councils. No other council spoke about man’s call or man’s vocation. Yet after the Council, there was a great crisis in vocations, due to a drop in the numbers of priests, religious, consecrated souls and persevering spouses. This merits deeper study and prayer.)

Revelation therefore demands an answer. The principle response required is that of faith. Faith will bring the just man to salvation, but of course a faith understood and lived out properly.[20] This is a faith of mind, an assent of heart, and an obedience of life. The rewards of a life of faith are great, “as it is written: ‘No eye has seen, no ear has heard, no mind has conceived what God has prepared for those who love him’” (1 Cor. 2:9; Isaiah 64:4); and indeed even in this life “contemplation is the reward of faith.”[21]

Tradition is a “handing down,” or a “passing on” of something. This word’s etymological root, “tradere,” in Latin means precisely these things.

The Lord, Jesus Christ, who is the Word of all divine revelation, commanded his apostles to preach the Gospel. This is why St. Paul says,

For God, who said, “Let light shine out of darkness,” made his light shine in our hearts to give us the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Christ. (2 Cor 4:6)

“This was faithfully done,”[22] by the Apostles and the work of the Holy Spirit. They passed on to us what they had received, “whether from the lips of Christ, from hi sway of life and his works, or whether they had learned it at the prompting of the Holy Spirit.”[23]

St. Irenaeus teaches us that bishops succeeded after the apostles. The apostles, he says, gave them “their own position of teaching authority.”[24]

The Apostles preached the Gospel, and did so in an exalted way in the sacred books. This was not the only way in which they passed on the Gospels. Indeed, there was a teaching of the apostles before there were even the writings of the New Testament Canon. They continually warned their flocks about false doctrines. Therefore, “sacred Tradition and sacred Scripture are bound closely together, and communicate with one another.”[25] They have one and the same source, constitute one reality, and have the same finality. They “make up a single sacred deposit of the Word of God, which is entrusted to the Church.”[26] Since it is entrusted to the Church, only the Church can pass it on and interpret it.

“The Tradition that comes from the apostles makes progress in the Church, with the help of the Holy Spirit.”[27] This does not mean that there is a growing revelation. In our day popular preachers easily repeat expressions like, “Let the Lord reveal himself to you in prayer,” and so forth; but this is an error, for revelation was completely handed on to the Apostles and there was nothing in Christ which God did not say. There is no more revelation, not because man today silences God, but because the Father has already revealed himself fully in the Son through the Holy Spirit. The progress in question is a growth, a contemplation, a better understanding of this immense mystery that has been passed on to us.

The Church refers to inspiration, surprisingly, when dealing with the sacred Scriptures, but seems to not affirm that sacred Tradition enjoys “inspiration.” The term is used to refer to the particular reality of the authors who wrote.

Since God has inspired his own Word, which is found in the pages of the sacred Scriptures, it is he himself who speaks to us in a human fashion.

Yet his inspiration did not dehumanize these authors, for they wrote knowingly and freely what they wanted to write. “To compose the sacred books, God chose certain men who, all the while he employed them in this task, made full use of their powers and faculties[28] so that, though he acted in them and by them, it was as true authors that they consigned to writing whatever he wanted written, and no more.”[29]

Therefore the Church teaches us that God wrote all of what he wanted and only what he wanted; and that the authors wrote employing their full knowledge and consent. This is similar to the mystery of the incarnation, where we have the marvelous truth of Jesus Christ who was true God and true man. That is, Sacred Scripture is true word of God and true word of Man. This is most fitting, for the Word in scripture is truly the Word of God, who is Jesus Christ, the Son of God and Son of Mary (cf. Jn 1:1).

That means that interpreting sacred Scripture (which is different from inspiration), we must responsibly take into account those elements that could help us understand what the author was trying to do. But the risk is to stop right there, which was the great problem of the Modernists.[30] For “God [is] the creator and Ruler of all things, is also the Author of the Scriptures.”[31] We must start always with the faith of the Church. The Rule of Faith is the surest guide to interpret sacred scripture truthfully. St. Augustine, in his magnificent De Trinitate (On the Trinity)[32] expounds on the fact that what the Church believes about the Trinity is the criterion to distinguish the truth in many elusive passages in scripture: that here “God” is referred to as the whole Trinity, that there “God” refers to just one of the three persons, and over there distinctions are made between whether the Son of God is being referred to in his humanity or his divinity or both. And so he shows how this “rule of faith,” this “deposit of faith,” which is a living mystery beyond human comprehension, is the criterion for all biblical interpretation.

There’s much discussion about the Bible in many circles today, but the most fundamental questions are often not addressed. These include: what’s in the Bible, as in what books? Why are some writings in there and others not? How did we get the list of accepted books that we have? Do all agree on what is or should be in the Bible, is there a way of ever knowing the answer to this, and if so how?

The list of the books in the Bible is called the Canon. The Catholic Church has 46 Old Testament books plus the 27 New Testament ones, for a total of 73 books; some protestant editions have as few as only 66. St. Jerome (341-420) was commissioned by Pope Damasus to translate the scriptures into Latin, and ever since his work has stood as the official Latin translation; it was even ratified in the Council of Trent, and a few of its defects weren’t addressed until Pope Pius X set a commission to do that in 1907, more than fifteen centuries later.

Not all have this list. For examples, contemporary Judaism has a Hebrew collection of scriptures divided into three parts: Hat-Torah, Nebiim, wa-Kéthubim, i.e. The Law, the Prophets, and the Writings. This canon is reported to go back to around the year 200 a.d., as established in a writing which proposes to codify the unwritten sacred laws of the Jews, and this writing’s name is the Mishna.

The clearest definition of the Canon is found in the Council of Trent, which established the Old Testament Canon in 1546.

The five books of Moses (Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy), Josue, Judges, Ruth, the four books of Kings, two of Paralipomenon, the first and second of Esdras (which latter is called Nehemias), Tobias, Judith, Esther, Job, the Davidic Psalter (in number one hundred and fifty Psalms), Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, the Canticle of Canticles, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Isaias, Jeremias, with Baruch, Ezechiel, Daniel, the twelve minor Prophets (Osee, Joel, Amos, Abdias, Jonas, Micheas, Nahum, Habacue, Sophonias, Aggeus, Zacharias, Malachias), two books of Machabees, the first and second.[33]

Where did it get this canon? In general terms, the Catholic Church was the Christian Church until the Protestant Dissent during the 16^th century under Martin Luther (1483-1546). He and many other protestants began questioning the content of the Bible and tendencies rose to change its content, sometimes even adding or subtracting verses or eliminating entire books. For example, the followers of Luther excluded Hebrews, James, Jude, and Apocalypse, for a century after Luther’s death, and even went further than their master by rejecting the three remaining deuterocanonicals,[34] II Peter, II and III John. Trent, the Council that mostly addressed the Protestant Dissent, therefore addressed the question of the Canon.

But in doing so, the council Fathers referred to other ancient sources, those who were saints, Church Fathers, greatly renowned theologians and saints (such as St. Ignatius of Antioch, St. Polycarp, St. Justin Martyr, Origen and Eusebius his disciple, Tertullian, St. Cyprian, St. Athanasius), writings of Popes (such as Innocent I,[35] Adrian I[36]) and other Church councils, specifically Florence.[37]

What Protestants or other non-Catholic Bible users fail to recognize is that the only reason they have the Bible they have is because since the earliest centuries, starting with the Apostles, the Catholic Church has carefully kept the scriptures, aided by the Providence of God, and discerned with the light of the Holy Spirit which writings were indeed God’s scriptures. It is therefore curious to see a Protestant use a Bible to refute the authority of the pastors of the Church or of the Pope, for if they indeed have no authority, the Bible would have no validity.

I would not even believe the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John unless the Catholic Church were to propose to me infallibly that these are indeed the Gospels.

The surroundings we live in today, most specifically the twenty-first century western world, experience many tragic temptations and falls into abominable sins; the first letter of Romans still applies to the man of our day. Among the most sensitive spiritual wounds are those of pride by which man rejects obedience, and relativism by which man wishes to construe his own truth.

Infallibility is exercised by the Pope “when as the supreme pastor and teacher of all the Christian Faithful, who strengthens his brothers and sisters in the faith, he proclaims by definitive act that a doctrine of faith or morals is to be held.”[38] The bishops enjoy this character only when these conditions are met:

The fact that we live in an age rife with dissent from Magisterial teachings on so many issues brings the following question to the forefront: what virtues, dispositions and attitudes must a Catholic take before a Magisterial teaching? The table on the following page may help.[39]

The Bible is truthful in religious matters, and of this fact there is little discussion, even though there has always been great debate regarding exactly how to arrive at that truth, and, especially among Protestants, whether the Catholic Church has the authority to pronounce on what that truth is. What are we Catholics to think?

It would be utterly impious to limit inspiration to some portions only of Sacred Scripture or to admit that the sacred author himself has erred. Nor can one tolerate the method of those who extricate themselves from difficulties by allowing without hesitation that divine inspiration extends to matters of faith and morals and to nothing more. […] For all the books in their entirety, which the Church receives as sacred and canonical, with all their parts, have been written under the dictation of the Holy Spirit. Now it is utterly impossible that divine inspiration could give rise to any error; it not only by its very nature excludes all error, but excludes and rejects it with the same necessity by which it is impossible that God, the highest Truth, be the author of any error whatsoever.”[43]

Pope Benedict XV, in 1920, further declared that inspiration extends to religious and profane matters. There are those, he says, that say that religion is the primary content and that is inerrant, but that the remaining content included in the Scriptures

was merely permitted and was left to subject to the shortcomings of the author. […] But it is apparent from the very words of the Pope (Leo XIII) how rash and wrong such contentions are.[44]

And he goes on to defend Leo’s stance that the inerrancy of scripture is not restricted to religion and morals. The historicity of the sacred text stands as true[45]; it is therefore not up to the theologian or scripture scholar to jettison Scripture or its content when difficulties arise, but to seek solutions to the problems.

Furthermore, Dei Verbum is very clear about the precise historicity of the Gospels which narrate the life and words of our Lord Jesus Christ, much to the chagrin of plenty of contemporary priests, lay preachers and proud theologians. We read,

Holy Mother Church has firmly and with absolute constancy held, and continues to hold, that the four Gospels just named, whose historical character the Church unhesitatingly asserts, faithfully hand on what Jesus Christ, while living among men, really did and taught for their eternal salvation until the day He was taken up into heaven (see Acts 1:1).[46]

[1] Nestle-Aland, Novum Testamentum Graece et Latine, Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, Stuttgart, 1984.

[2] Author’s tr.

[3] St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, I, II, prol.

[4] DV 2; CCC 51; Eph 1:9; 2:18; 1 Pet 1:4.

[5] DV 4

[6] John Paul II, Apostolic Constitution Fidei Depositum: On the Publication of the Catechism of the Catholic Church Prepared Following the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, in Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC), 2^nd ed., Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 1997, p. 1.

[7] Pius XII, Encyclical Letter Humani Generis, Concerning Some False Opinions Which Threaten to Undermine the Foundations of Catholic Doctrine, August 12, 1950, 18.

[8] Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office, Lamentabili Sane, The Syllabus of Errors (Condemning the Errors of the Modernists), July 3, 1907.

[9] cf. DV, 10, §1.

[10] CCC 84.

[11] DV, 10, §2.

[12] cf. CCC 85-86.

[13] CCC 889, cf. LG 12; cf. DV 10.

[14] cf. CIC 749, §1.

[15] cf. CIC 749, §2.

[16] CCC, 88.

[17] Vatican I, 1870; Session III, Canons, 4. de fide et ratione, 1.

[18] DV, 2.

[19] GS, 24.

[20] cf. entire letter of St. James. The doctrine on justification shall be dealt with in a different unit.

[21] St. Augustine, On the Trinity, tr. E. Hill, ed. J. Rotelle, New City Press, NY, 2002, p. 77; I, 17.

[22] DV, 7.

[23] Ibid.

[24] St. Irenaeus, Adv. Haer. (Against the Heretics), III, 3, 1; PG 7, 848.

[25] DV, 9.

[26] DV, 10.

[27] DV, 8; cf. Vatican I, Dogm. Const. on the Catholic Faith, c. 4 (on faith and reason).

[28] cf. Pius XII, Encycl. Divino Afflante Spiritu, 30 Sept. 1943: AAS 35 (1943), p. 314.

[29] DV, 11.

[30] cf. Pius X, Pascendi, an Encyclical that studies at length the many subtleties of Modernism, which he dubs “the heresy of all heresies.”

[31] Leo XIII, Providentissimus Deus, 1893.

[32] St. Augustine, De Trinitate, op.cit. 1,21 and 2,3.

[33] Council of Trent, Session IV, 1546.

[34] Books that had been submitted to doubt, discussion and discernment in the early Church, as to whether they were parts of the Bible or not; the Church eventually clarified that, indeed, they were.

[35] Innocent I, Letter sent in 405 to a Gallican Bishop, containing a canon.

[36] Pope Adrian I; the aforementioned catalogue of Innocent I appears in the collection of ecclesiastical canons sent by Pope Adrian I to Charlemagne, canons which were adopted in 802 as the law of the Church in the Frankish Empire.

[37] Council of Basil-Ferrara-Florence-Rome, Session 11, Tanner p. 572.

[38] CIC 749, §1.

[39] Derived from JPII, Ad tuendam fidem, May 18, 1998, and the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith, Commentary (on Ad tuendam fidem), June 29, 1998.

[40] CDF, Commentary, 5.

[41] The 1997 Guide or Vademecum for confessors concerning some aspects for the Morality of Conjugal Life described the Church’s teaching on the “intrinsic evil of contraception” as “definitive and irreformable”.

[42] CDF, Commentary, 6.

[43] Leo XIII, Providentissimus Deus, on the Study Of Holy Scripture, November 18, 1893, cited in Neuner-Dupuis, n. 226, p. 107.

[44] cf. Neuner-Dupuis, n. 230, p. 110.

[45] Ibid., n. 231.

[46] DV, 19. The whole paragraph is surely worth reading.