Second, from the usage of the apostles.
Second, from the usage of the apostles.
§ 497. [II] From the usage of the apostles. “Throughout the world, the apostles preached the Gospel and established churches. Nevertheless they did not write their Gospels nor Epistles in the languages of those nations to whom they were preaching but only in Hebrew and Greek and, as some would have it, in Latin.” He proves that they did not write in any other languages by saying that: (1) “There is extant no trace of any apostolic writings except in Greek.” (2) “Paul wrote to the Romans in Greek, though Latin and not Greek was the Romans’ common language. Peter and James wrote in Greek to the Jews scattered throughout the world, though neither Hebrew nor Greek but the language of that region where they were living was their mother tongue. John wrote his first Epistle in Greek to the Parthians.”
We respond. (1) The apostles preached the Gospel in the vernacular to each people and nation. But now, the same thing the apostles preached is contained in their writings. Therefore it is no sin if those things are presented to any people translated into their vernacular tongues. (2) They wrote in Greek because at that time this language was the most familiar of all and was known to those to whom they wrote. (3) For some time, the early apostolic Church lacked the New Testament Scriptures, for the apostles who were instructed by the immediate inspiration of the Holy Spirit were still alive, and they could learn the truth from those apostles. How much more could they have needed translations of Scripture into their own vernacular language? (4) As time passed, various translations followed, as we have shown earlier. (5) If one could conclude from the apostles’ writing only in Greek that the Scriptures must not be translated into vernacular languages, then it would also follow that the Romans ought not be reading Scripture in Latin translations, because none of the apostles wrote in Latin.
We respond to the nonsense that Baronius, in vol. 1, Annal., ann. 45, babbles about a Gospel of Mark written in Latin in the words of Bellarmine himself: “Because there is no mention of this among the ancients, we cannot be persuaded easily to believe it” (De verb. Dei, bk. 2, c. 4).