Rules for the interpretation of Scripture: First, the meaning of Scripture is to be drawn out from Scripture itself.
Rules for the interpretation of Scripture: First, the meaning of Scripture is to be drawn out from Scripture itself.
§ 529. These are the general rules for the legitimate interpretation of Scripture: (I) The meaning of Scripture must be drawn out from Scripture itself. St. Peter proposes this rule: “No prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation” (2 Pet. 1:20). He immediately adds the reason: “Because no prophecy ever came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit” (2 Pet. 1:21). The argument of the apostle goes like this: Whatever has not proceeded from human will or judgment, that also must not be explained by human or private judgment. Holy Scripture has not proceeded from human judgment. Therefore it ought not be explained by human or private judgment. Furthermore: Whoever is the principal and chief author of Scripture, who once promulgated and published the sacred tables of divine truth through the prophets and apostles, he is also the chief and authentic interpreter of them. But now, the Holy Spirit is the chief and principal author of Scripture. Therefore He is also the authentic interpreter of it. Finally: Whoever is the final and infallible judge of theological controversies is also the chief and authentic interpreter of Scripture. But the Holy Spirit is the chief and infallible judge of controversies, as we taught earlier. Therefore He is also the authentic interpreter of Scripture. Hence, all legitimate and solid interpretation of Scripture must be sought either from the immediate inspiration of the Holy Spirit (which today no longer takes place in the Church) or from Scripture itself.
We can illustrate the argument of the apostle with this comparison. Just as in human affairs, it is equitable for the interpretation of the law to proceed from the source that provided the law ([Jus canonicum, Decretal. Gregor. IX.,] De sent. excommunic, c. Inter alia, § Ut igitur, where we have the gloss: “To whomever the establishment of law pertains, to him also pertains the interpretation thereof”), and just as the establishment of laws has been granted to the emperor alone and for this reason “the responsibility for interpreting the laws must belong to this power alone” (bk. Si imperialis Ct. de LL.), so also, much more, does the interpretation of Scripture (namely, autocratically and authentically) belong to Him who first gave it. Therefore the interpretation of Scripture belongs to the Holy Spirit, who speaks to us today only in and through the Scriptures. The consequence is that we must seek the legitimate interpretation of Scripture from Scripture itself.
§ 530. We have proved this very thing in detail in our treatise On the Interpretation of Scripture [1610 Loci Theologici, locus 2], §§ 127ff. In support of this position, we cited many statements of the fathers, to which the following should be added:
Clement of Rome (because the Papists want it so), Epistle 5: “It must be noted carefully that, when one is reading God’s Law, he should not read nor teach it according to the understanding of his own genius, for there are many words in the Holy Scriptures that can be taken in that sense which each person has intentionally presumed for himself. This, however, should not happen. You should not look for a strange and foreign meaning to corrupt from outside, nor should you confirm this in any way by the authority of Scripture. Instead, you should grasp the meaning of the truth from the Scriptures themselves.” (This is quoted in Jus canonicum, distinct. 37, c. Relatum.)
Irenaeus, Adv. haeres., bk. 2, c. 46, p. 146: “The sound meaning and that which is without peril, which God has made subject to our knowledge, will be mediated easily. These things are set in the Scriptures openly and without ambiguity in the words themselves. Therefore parables ought to be adapted to what is ambiguous. Whoever explains them in this way explains them without peril. He will receive the explanation of the parable from everyone in the same way. The entire body perseveres on the basis of the truth with a similar adaptation of its members and without harm.” Bk. [3], c. 12, p. 193: “But while I bring out by these proofs the truths of Scripture and set forth briefly and compendiously things that are stated in various ways, attend to them with patience, and do not deem them verbose, taking this into account: that proofs of the things which are contained in the Scriptures cannot be shown except from the Scriptures themselves.” Bk. 4, c. 63, p. 292: “(True knowledge) is a legitimate and careful explanation according to the Scriptures that is without peril or blasphemy.”
Justin, QQ. et resp. ad orthod., q. 27, p. 318: “To ask why Moses did not give the reason for his words and acts is as if you were to say, ‘Why did the authors of Holy Writ publish it without adding an interpretation?’ whereas the purpose and meaning of the thing are contained significantly in the actual mentioning of the thing.”
Hilary, De Trinit., bk. 2, p. 13: “There have been many people who have taken the simplicity of the heavenly words for the meaning of their own will but not to explain the actual truth, as they interpret differently than what the force of the passages demands. Heresy, you see, comes from one’s understanding, not from Scripture. The meaning, not the word, becomes the crime.” De Trinit., bk. 5: “Let us pursue the meaning on the basis of the words; let us understand the reason from the meaning; and from the reason let us grasp the truth.”
Basil, Sermon 2, De Baptism., c. 4: “Let us obey the Lord when He says, ‘Search the Scriptures.’ Let us imitate the disciples, who kept asking the Lord Himself for an explanation of His words. From what He said elsewhere, let us learn the truth and soundness of the things He said here.”
Ambrose, sermon 8 on Psalm 118, toward the end: “There is much obscurity in the prophetic Scriptures. However, if you knock at the door of the Scriptures with the hand of your mind, and if you carefully examine the things that are hidden, you will gradually begin to gather the meaning of the statements, and it will be opened to you, not from someone else, but from God’s Word.”
Augustine, De civit. Dei, bk. 17, c. 17: “Then, indeed, the other things also which are said there less openly are rightly understood when they agree with those that shine with such great clearness.”
§ 531. On the basis of this first general rule, we draw two deductive conclusions: (1) Thetically: One who would approach the interpretation of Scripture must ash for the illumination of the Holy Spirit, because prophecy is given by the Holy Spirit (1 Cor. 12:9). God gives the Holy Spirit to those who ask (Luke 11:3), and He grants wisdom to those who ask for it in their prayers (James 1:5). After Justin had spoken about the eminence of the prophetic books, he added: “Before everything else, pray that the gates of light be opened to you, for no one perceives and understands them unless God and His Christ grant understanding” (Dialog. cum Tryph., p. 173). (In support of this position we have cited more statements from the ancients in our Method. stud. theolog., part 1, c. 3.)
(2) Antithetically: The following are not an infallible and certain rule for the interpretation of Scripture: [a] The principles of human reason left to itself. Otherwise our faith would be held captive under the obedience of reason against the apostle’s command (2 Cor. 10:5). Those things that are beyond reason would be subjected to reason, and divine matters would be placed second to human matters in a preposterous and inverse ranking. [b] The statements of the fathers and doctors of the Church, since they remove this authority from themselves and want judgment to be passed on their writings from Holy Scripture. Also (and this cannot be denied) their interpretations are alien to the text and erroneous, and an infinite variety of interpretations occurs among them. [c] The decrees of councils, since they come after the interpretation of Scripture and they do not interpret all of Scripture. Also, the fathers, even when gathered in councils, can err and often have erred. Furthermore, even the Papists quite often depart from the fathers and councils in their interpretation of Scripture. [d] The desires of the Roman popes, since they themselves also can err and have erred quite often, and at times they are deprived of the means necessary for the interpretation of Scripture, etc.