Chapter I: Nomenclature includes: (1) Etymology, § 2. (2) Homonyms, § 3. (3) Synonyms, § 9. The factual material explain
CHAPTER I: ON THE NOMENCLATURE OF HOLY SCRIPTURE
First, etymology.
§ 2. To nomenclature pertains: (I) Etymology. “Scripture” is so called from the external formal [cause], namely, from the act of writing by which God’s Word, formerly propagated orally, was consigned to letters at God’s command. God Himself made a majestic beginning of this writing when He inscribed His Law on tables of stone on Mount Sinai. For that reason it is called “the writing of God” (Exod. 32:16). Moreover, it is called “Scripture” and also “the Book” [biblia] preeminently, according to epithet, and according to a special word, because it is God’s book [
], the book that proceeds from God, deals with God, and leads to God. For the sake of difference, it is called “Holy Scripture,” which is taken from Rom. 1:2 and 2 Tim. 3:15 (where it is called “Holy Scriptures” [
] and “Sacred Writ” [
]).
We must look for the rationale for the name: (1) From its principal efficient cause, from its foremost author, who is the holy God of the holy ones, who is, in fact, holiness itself (see Isa. 6:3; Dan. 9:24). (2) From its instrumental cause, which is the holy men of God (2 Pet. 1:21), namely, the prophets and apostles who were moved by the Holy Spirit. Theodoret (in the preface to his commentary on the Psalms, vol. 1, p. 79) and Gregory (in the preface to his commentary on Job, c. 1) teach: “The hands of the holy writers were the pens of the Holy Spirit that He used in writing the sacred volumes.” (3) From its material, for it contains the sacred and divine mysteries, the holy precepts of life (Ps. 105:42), sacred histories, etc. (4) From its end and effect, because the Holy Spirit sanctifies a person through his reading of and meditation on Scripture (John 17:17). Clement of Alexandria, Paraenet. ad gentes, p. 29: “That is truly Holy Writ that makes people holy and deifies them.” (5) From its adjunct, because it has been separated from all writings, not only secular but also ecclesiastical, and has been set on the lofty throne of canonical authority that every faithful and devout intellect may serve it.
Second, homonyms.
§ 3. The expression “Holy Scripture” is used either generally and improperly for all the books contained in the codex of the Bible, whether they are canonical or apocryphal, or specifically and properly for the canonical books of the Old and New Testaments only. Jerome, in the preface to Judith, writes: “The Council of Nicaea has counted that book [Judith] in the Holy Scriptures.” This, however, did not make it a canonical book. The Second Council of Toledo, canon 1, calls the Book of Wisdom “Holy Scripture,” but it, too, is outside the canon. The Papists will not be able to reject this distinction of the term because they themselves also exclude some books from the canon that are contained in the codex of the Bible, as will become clear below.
§ 4. In De concil., bk. 2, c. 12, § Dico secundo, Bellarmine establishes a still broader and more general appellation for “Holy Scripture” when he argues in defense of Gratian, who in the Jus canonicum (dist. 19, c. In canonicis) had said that “the decrees of the popes are holy and canonical Scriptures,” as follows: “We call the decrees of the popes ‘holy Scriptures’ to distinguish them from secular decrees, and ‘canonical’ to distinguish them from the writings of the fathers, which are not rules.” And later: “We can call the canons of the popes and councils in their own way holy and canonical writings.” This he argues from act. 3 of the Seventh Council, etc. Also, in [jus canonicum, c.] Cum Martha. extr. de celebrat. miss. [X 4.41.6], there is a gloss that says, “Here the writings of Augustine are called Holy Scripture.” We refuse to accept this improper way of speaking, however, and apply the name “holy and canonical Scripture,” taken properly and specifically, solely to the canonical books of the Old and New Testaments. Meanwhile, from this distinction of Bellarmine we draw the following useful consequence: If one is totally unable to prove from the title “Holy Scripture,” as it is given to the canons of popes and councils, that the decrees of popes and councils belong to the canon of Scripture, then he will also be unable to prove from the title “Holy Scripture,” as it is given to the apocryphal books, that those hidden and disputed books belong to the canon of Scripture. But the first statement is true. Therefore the latter is also true. Consequently, there is no force in the argument taken from the title “Holy Scripture” with which Bellarmine presses his entire case for claiming the authority of those disputed books, as we shall teach more fully in its own place.
§ 5. The following also relates to an explanation of the homonyms of the word. With the name “Scripture” we must understand not so much the external form [formale] or signs (that is, the shape of the letters)—the acts and utterances of writing by which the divine revelation is put into writing—as the material itself or what is designated, and indeed the very thing that the writing denotes and signifies, namely, the very Word of God, which instructs us in the essence and will of God. Some state this in such a way that the Word of God is taken either essentially, as the very meaning that God expresses, or adventitiously, according to what has happened, which are preaching and writing. For as in every writing brought about by a cause that is understanding or intellectual, so also in this prophetic and apostolic Scripture we must consider two points: first, the very letters, syllables, and phrases that are written—the external symbols that signify and express ideas of the mind—and second, the very meanings that are, as it were, something signified and expressed by those external symbols of letters, syllables, and words. Consequently, we include both—and principally the latter—when we use the word “Scripture” here.
§ 6. From this we draw some deductive conclusions. (1) Some things are predicated of Scripture with respect to its material [cause], namely, that it is older than the Church, that it is the very Word of God that the prophets and apostles actually preached. And some things [are predicated of Scripture] with respect to its formal [cause], that it is later then the Church with regard to time, that it will come to an end on the Last Day, though with regard to its material it cannot be dissolved nor can it perish (John 10:35).
There is no real difference between the Word of God and Scripture.
§ 7. (2) Between “the Word of God” and “Holy Scripture,” as we take that expression materially, there is no real difference. We prove this: [a] From the material of scripture. The prophets and apostles wrote the same things as—and nothing else than—what they had first learned by divine inspiration and actually preached (1 Cor. 15:1; 2 Cor. 1:13; Phil. 3:1; 2 Thess. 2:15; 1 John 1:3-5). That last passage is very emphatic: “That which we have seen and heard we proclaim to you…. And we are writing these things that your joy may be full. This is the message we have heard from Him and proclaim to you.” “These things” surely are not of different kinds. Irenaeus, Adv. haeres., bk. 3, c. 1, p. 169: “We have learned the disposition of our salvation through none other than those through whom the Gospel has come to us. This they proclaimed at one time orally; but later, by the will of God, they gave us the future foundation and pillar of our faith in the Scriptures.” Nicephorus, Histor., bk. 2, c. 34: “What Paul had taught clearly with his preaching while he was present, he reminded them of while he was absent by summarizing it in letters.”
[b] From the equal force of the two phrases. The prophecies of the Old Testament are sometimes mentioned in the New in these words: “That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet” (Matt. 1:22; 2:15; 4:14; etc.). And sometimes this is done with these formulas: “… that it might fulfill which was written”; “What does Scripture say?”; “It is written in the prophets …”; “It is written …” (Matt. 4:4, 7, 10; Mark 15:28; John 19:36; Rom. 4:3; 10:11; 11:2; etc.). Therefore what the prophets said or preached is the same as what they wrote. Reading and hearing the Word of God, then, are considered of exactly equal value. In Luke 16:29, the brothers of the feasting rich man are commanded to “listen to Moses and the prophets.” They were unable to listen to Moses and the prophets, however, because they had died several centuries earlier. Therefore they are being sent back to open the writings of Moses and the prophets. Consequently, to read the writings of Moses and the prophets is to listen to Moses and the prophets. Acts 13:27: “The voices of the prophets … are read every Sabbath.” Therefore whoever is present at the reading of the prophetic writings hears the voices of the prophets, that is, the very thing the prophets actually said. Acts 15:21: “From ancient times Moses has had in every city those who preach him.” But how was Moses—that is, Mosaic instruction—being preached in every city? The explanation follows immediately: “… for he is read every Sabbath in the synagogues.” In Matt. 17:5 a voice from a cloud commands us to listen to Christ. In Luke 10:16 we are ordered to listen to the apostles. However, we can listen to them today in no other way than in the writings of the evangelists and apostles, which are, in every part, of the same genus as the canonical books of the Old Testament. You see, in and through those writings they speak to us, just as Christ Himself supplies the explanation in John 5:39: “Search the Scriptures…. It is they that bear witness of Me.”
[c] From the rule of logic: “An accident does not change the essence of a thing.” It is an accident [accidit] to God’s Word whether it is enunciated orally or consigned to writing. It is one and the same Word of God, whether we become familiar with it by oral or written means, because neither the principal efficient cause nor the material nor the internal form nor its end have changed. Rather, only the means of revelation in the instrumental use [in usu organico] varies. In Exod. 20:13 it is written: “You shall not kill.” This statement is identical to that which was later spoken and repeated orally by Christ (Matt. 5:21).
[d] From the demonstrative particle that the apostles use. Paul says demonstratively about the writings of Moses and about the books of the Old and New Testaments, which are of the same genus: “This is the word of faith that we preach” (Rom. 10:[8]). Peter writes: “The Word of the Lord abides forever. Now this is the word that was preached to you” (1 Pet. 1:25). To this pertains also the statement of John that we brought out earlier (1 John 1:3-5).
[e] From the nature of similar things. Just as a royal mandate is one and the same thing whether the voice of the crier proclaims it or it is written down and attached to a public notice, so also the written and unwritten Word of God is one and the same thing. Just as a man who was deprived of yesterday’s light but basks in today’s light is one man, who is constituted in two ways but is not double or two men, so also the Word of God that was first spoken orally and later was written down is not a double Word of God but is one and the same thing that is constituted in two ways.
[f] From the absurd consequence. If the Word is double, written and unwritten, then the Gospel will be double and the promise of grace double. The apostle bears witness to the contrary (Gal. 3:15-16). If there were a division of the Word into written and unwritten, it would not be the division of a subject into its own accidents but a division of genus into species; thus it would involve the very essence of the Word. The consequence would be that once it was declared, the Word of God would vanish, and when the books are destroyed, the Word of God would be destroyed. There are many other absurdities of this sort. Christ gives an opposite witness in Luke 21:33 and Isa. 40:[9].
§ 8. (3) The Papists make a less correct distinction between the written and unwritten Word of God. One can be satisfied with their arguments by which they try to prove their hypothesis if he were to note that: [a] One can allow this distinction in a certain manner and respect, namely, if he takes the expression “the unwritten Word” to mean the divine revelation that the patriarchs propagated orally before the books of Moses were produced. After the canon of Scripture was published, however, no unwritten Word of God can be established as contradistinct from the written Word. [b] There must be a distinction between the principal1 points of the divine revelation ([which are] necessary, essential, etc.) and the more detailed explanation of them. The prophets and apostles put down in writing the principal points of their instruction, which all people must know. Yet we do not deny that they explained these orally in more detail. Cyril, on John, bk. 12, c. 68, near the end: “Not everything that the Lord did was written, but that which the writers believed was sufficient for behavior as well as for doctrine was written, so that glowing with upright faith and works and virtue we might, in Christ Jesus, reach the kingdom of heaven.” Augustine, treatise 49 on John, at the beginning: “Although the Lord Jesus did many things, not all were written, as the holy evangelist bears witness that the Lord Christ said and did many things that were not written. But those things were selected to be written that seemed sufficient for the salvation of those who believe.”
Third, synonyms.
§ 9. ** The Holy Spirit calls Holy Scripture “writing” [
] or “the writings” par excellence (John 7:38, 42; Acts 8:12; Rom. 4:3). At times an epithet is added: “the holy writings” (Rom. 1:2). **
[Also:] “Holy Writ” [
] (2 Tim. 3:15), “the God-breathed writing” (2 Tim. 3:16), because just as men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke, so also did holy men of God write (2 Pet. 1:21). Galatinus says that the rabbinic scholars call the Bible 
, “God’s holy thing,” as well as 
, “the house of the sanctuary” (De arcan. Catholic. verit., bk. 1, c. 1). This latter title is prefixed to the Venetian Bible. Because there is no real distinction between the Word of God and Holy Scripture considered materially, therefore we must consider the honorable titles that are given to God’s Word in the Scriptures as synonyms. For example, 
, “the Word of God,” published by God and instructing us about God; 
, “the utterances of God” (Rom. 3:2); 
, “the living and active Word of God” (Heb. 4:12); 
, “the words of eternal life” (John 6:68). All of Psalm 119 especially pertains to this, in which many honorable titles are assigned to God’s Word. The Holy Spirit calls the connected sacred books “the Book of the Law” (Josh. 1:8), “the book of Jehovah” (Isa. 34:16), “the reading” (Neh. 8:8) because we ought to give constant attention to the Law for our salvation.
§ 10. We must also refer to this point those honorable praises and various periphrases with which the theologians of the Church adorn Holy Scripture. Athanasius, Dial. 2. contra Maced.: “Scripture is the bread of life.” Basil, on Psalm 1: “Scripture is the common medical office for souls.” Augustine (Enarr. Ps. 90, c. 2, and in Sermon 56 ad fratr. in erem.), Macarius (Homily 33), and Gregory (bk. 4, epistle 40) call Scripture “the letters of invitation that God has transmitted to us through holy men that invite us to our eternal fatherland.” Augustine says, “What is Holy Scripture except an epistle from God Almighty to His creation in which we hear the words of God and learn His heart?” Dionysius the Carthusian, commentary on Titus: “The divine utterances are like dew and water, milk and honey, and wine: because of their power to give and strengthen life, as is true of milk; because of their power to restore life, as is true of wine; and because of their power to cleanse and at the same time to preserve life, as is true of honey.” Petrus de Alliaco, Sent., bk. 2: “Scripture penetrates like a sword, crushes like a hammer, and burns like a torch. Like a sword it cuts out the tares of error; like a hammer it destroys all heresies; like a torch it burns the kindling of sins; like a lantern it stands through the silent nocturnes of this world as a light for those who pass by.” Holy Scripture is “the measure of faith, the judge of behavior and error, and the polestar pointing out the way to heaven.” Scripture is “the mouth of the Holy Spirit,” through which it calls believers. It is “the hand of the Holy Spirit,” through which it leads believers to eternal life. It is “light,” through which it illumines the eyes of little children. Scripture is an 
, an expression of divine wisdom that the Holy Spirit has communicated by breathing on holy men. “What a raft is for the shipwrecked sailor, a sword for the soldier, a mallet for the silversmith, a ruler for the architect—this is what Holy Scripture is for the faithful.” (Cf. our Aphor. practic., under the title Verbum Dei.)
1 Read principalia instead of principalis.