Thesis 1

DIVINE REVELATION

Scope: (1) The nature of divine revelation; (2) the Transmission of the Revelation and (3) the interrelationship
of Divine Tradition and Sacred Scripture; (4) the Nature of Inspiration and (5) the Interpretation of Sacred
Scripture; (6) the various approaches to the understanding of Inspiration and to Biblical Hermeneutics; (7) the
interrelationship of the Old and New Testament.

I. NATURE OF DIVINE REVELATION

Through an utterly free decision, God has revealed himself and given himself to man. This he does by revealing
(1) the mystery, (2) his plan of loving goodness, formed from all eternity in Christ for the benefit of all men.
God has fully revealed this plan by sending us his beloved Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit.1

1. Etymology

“Revelation” comes from Latin word “revelare” which means “to remove the veil.”

2. Biblical Foundation

a. Old Testament

The Old Testament affirms that man of himself cannot know God. God is known only when he lets himself be
known, when he decides to reveal himself (Deut 4:32-34), because he has shown himself to Israel (Ps 147:19f).
From beginning, God reveals himself to our first parents in created realities, by inviting them to intimate
communion with himself and clothed them with resplendent grace and justice. This revelation was not broken
up by our first parents` sin, since God has promised them with the hope of salvation. God wants to gather his
shattered children by establishing first covenant with Noah, then with Abraham, through whose descendants
God form Israel as his people.

Indeed, the Old Testament clearly takes the view that in spite of God's majesty, He still wants to reveal himself
to his people. He reveals his name (Ex 3:13-15; Is 64:1ff), his power (Ex 14:15-31; Jer 16:21), his action (Hab
3:2), and his aid (Ps 98:2). However, God's revelation is understood only when man, who hears it, put it into
practice or undergone as history (1 Sam 16:3; 2 Sam 7:21; Jer 11:18; Deut 8:19). God's revelation takes place in
history and the history of God with man is both the object and the means of his revelation. And the goal of
God's revelation in the Old Testament is the choosing of Israel to be the people of the covenant. According to
Old Testament God reveals himself in history as a promise for the people of Israel and of all nations (Mic 4;5;
6:3-5; Jer 11:5; Deut 4:37; Ex 32:13; Is 41:8-10; Gen 9:11). God reveals the goal of man and history by
showing himself as active in history.”2

b. New Testament

The revelation begun in the Old Testament is fulfilled in the New Testament. But instead of being transmitted
by many intermediaries, it is concentrated now in Jesus Christ who is at the same time its author and object. The
starting point of the New Testament is still Jewish, the essential invisibility of God (Jn 1:18, 6:46; 1 Jn 4:20).
But the emphatic assertion that God is only visible and attainable in the Incarnation of Jesus, in the words and
works of Jesus makes a clear distinction between the revelation of the Old Testament and New Testament in

1
CCC, no. 50.
2
Karl Rahner (ed.), Encyclopedia of Theology, 1455.
1
Christ. “In many and various ways God spoke of old to our fathers by the prophets, but in these last days he has
spoken to us by a Son” (Heb 1:1-2).

The mystery of God's will is revealed through the death and resurrection of Jesus, in his bond with the Church
as his body, in the summing up of the universe in Christ (Rom 3:25; 16:25f; 1 Cor 15:28; Eph 1:9f; 3:9-11; Col
1:18). In this perspective, Christ is the content of the mystery of God (Rom 3:21-24; Gal 1:16; Eph 3:3,5; 1 Tim
3:16).

In the New Testament, Jesus is presented as the revelation of God because He is the fulfillment of all promises
in a salvation history. Therefore, “the Christian dispensation, as the new and definitive covenant, will never pass
away and we now await no further new public revelation before the glorious manifestation of our Lord Jesus
Christ (1 Tim 6:14; Tit 2:13).”3

3. Patristic Understandings of Divine Revelation

- Apostolic Fathers understood revelation as ‘Good News’ of salvation, which is embodied in Christ, its
supreme herald. They saw the apostles as the messengers of this ‘Good News.’ Ignatius of Antioch held that the
Word of God as manifested first in creation, then in the Old Testament through the prophets, culminating in
Christ.

- Apologists, Justin the Martyr et al, focused sharply on the philosophical aspects of revelation and saw Jesus
Christ as ‘Logos-made-flesh.’ Irenaeus focused on the dynamic and historical character of revelation: revelation
is seen as a movement from God to God – from Trinity to beatific vision, with Christ at the center of the
movement. Revelation is the epiphany or manifestation of God in Christ.

- Early Greek Fathers: (1) Alexandrians had similar ideas with apologists. Clement held that Christ is the
answer for our quest for truth. He reveals the Father and the mysteries of eternal life; while the apostles were
commissioned to preach the Gospel, transmitted to the Church the deposit of faith they have received and
preserved intact. (2) Cappadocians pointed out two means of access to the Father – visible creation and the
teaching of faith. Understanding comes from Christ, under the illuminating force of the Holy Spirit.

- Early Latin Writers: Revelation as an inner light by which we are able to believe than as that which is
proposed for belief. In Christ we have God-revealing and God-revealed (Augustine).

4. Magisterial Teachings

- Council of Trent: The Council was intent on preserving the ‘objective’ character of revelation as existing
independently of the believer’s faith. In other words, the Council developed its position in dealing with the
sources of revelation and what it says about faith (versus the Sola Scriptura, position of eh Protestants).

- Vatican I: In order to counteract rationalism, materialism, pantheism, semi-rationalism, fideism and

traditionalism, the Council insisted that some revelatory truths are accessible to reason and can be found in the
natural order, while others come to us through the prophets, apostolic witnesses and the Church. In other words,
the Council held that revelation can include truths of the natural order and that there are mysteries which can
and have been revealed. We have to take note that Trent and Vatican I were not concerned so much with
providing a fully developed theology of revelation as they were with combating what they considered to be
doctrinal errors. It is not surprising, therefore, that in their polemics they carried on a rather ‘cognitive’
approach to revelation.

3
Dei Verbum., no. 4.
2
- Vatican II: Dei Verbum – It reflects the contemporary shift toward emphasizing the promissory nature of
revelation and the notion of God's self-communication. Its treatment of revelation is more biblical, more attuned
to the theme of salvation history, more personalistic and less ‘propositional’ than previous Catholic documents
on the subject had been. The Second Vatican Council no longer views revelation simply in terms of
propositional truths that support dogmatic positions. It rather challenges us to think of revelation not as a
collection of timeless formulas, but as an always enlivening embodiment of God's word that can illuminate and
transform each new situation in a special way.4

5. Theological Discussion

In the history of Christian theology, ‘revelation’ has often been understood as an inner ‘illumination’ or as a
divine teaching or instruction. At times this understanding has led to what has been called a ‘propositional
theory’ of revelation, that is, ‘revelation has been taken to be communication of information capable of being
expressed in sentences or propositions. One of the prominent figures was St. Thomas Aquinas, who understood
revelation as the ‘saving act by which God provides us with the truths necessary for our salvation.’

Today, revelation is understood fundamentally as God's self-revelation. It is first of all the gift of God's own
being, and only secondly is it the illuminative or propositional unfolding of the foundation event of a divine
self-giving. In this perspective, revelation is not primarily the uncovering of hidden truths of information but
rather “revelation is fundamentally the communication of the mystery of God to the world.” 5 Thus, the idea of
revelation in contemporary theology tends to converge with the biblical theme of creation. Creation itself is
already the self-revelation of God.

BRIDGE: FAITH

Faith is a “response term”: In faith I hear and know the good news about Jesus` death and resurrection, those
events in which the self-communication of the Triune God reached its unsurpassable and normative climax. In
the history of revelation and salvation, faith confesses the special divine intervention and presence. Faith is
also a response term” inasmuch as it expresses the human response to the questioning God who is personally
present in Jesus Christ and asks “what are you looking for?” (Jn.1:38) The confession, commitment and
confidence of faith bring a new center in God.

Faith has the aesthetic satisfaction: why should one respond in faith? How does this response take place? One
of the answers comes from the letter of St. Paul to the Romans (10:17): the preached word and an interior
illumination make it possible to acknowledge in faith the divine self-communication in Christ. Faith comes
from hearing the external proclamation, but it is not simply the public persuasiveness of the preacher which
brings faith about, this is due to the power of God.

THE ROLE OF THE REASON

Some Christians have not been particularly concerned with the rational character of faith. In order to deal with
this matter, we have to admit that Self-communication has a multi-leveled structure and calls for human
involvement in his all powers of mind and reason. Therefore, people come to believe when in the midst of life's
experiences they encounter the good news about Christ. Further, experience entails discernment, interpretation
and expression, and of which processes are inconceivable apart from human reason. Secondly, to exclude the
reason from the sphere of Christian faith turns faith in to an irrational sacrificium intellectus, which fails to
respect what creation and redemption mean.

4
Joseph A. Komonchak, Mary Collins, Dermot A. Lane (eds.), The New Dictionary of Theology, Pasay City: Saint Paul
Publications, 1991), 885-886.
5
Joseph A. Komonchak, Mary Collins, Dermot A. Lane (eds.), The New Dictionary of Theology, 884.
3
Regarding to the role of reason, we can affirm that faith in God is not something subtle, blindly, but it is a “yes-
but”: yes needed in order to uphold this role against those who deny or minimize it; but – faith may not be
reduced to a merely rational transaction. Yes, faith is reasonable; it can point to evidence in support of itself.
But – faith is not rational, at least not rational in the sense of being able to provide totally comprehensive and
utterly conclusive arguments for its position.

II. THE TRANSMISSION OF DIVINE REVELATION

“God ‘desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth’ (1 Tim 2:4), that is, of Christ
Jesus. Christ must be proclaimed to all nations and individuals, so that this revelation may reach to the ends of
the earth.”6 Hence, it needs for the transmission of divine revelation.

The process of Christian tradition begins with Jesus who embodied and proclaimed the fullness of revelation
and entrusted it as the Gospel to his chosen Apostles. Guided by the Holy Spirit, the Apostles preached the
‘Good News’ and saw to it that the message was committed to writing. The Apostles carried out Christ's
commission in two ways: (1) by their ‘oral teaching, by example, and by observances.’ 7 They ‘handed on what
they had received from the lips of Christ, from living with Him, and from what He did, or what they had learned
through the prompting of the Holy Spirit.”8 (2) ‘The commission was fulfilled, too, by those apostles and
apostolic men who under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit committed message of salvation to wring.”9

“In order that the full and living Gospel might always be preserved in the Church, the apostles left bishops as
their successors. They gave them their own position of teaching authority.” 10 Thanks to this link, the Church
possesses the Gospel in its twofold form of apostolic tradition and Scripture.

III. THE INTERRELATIONSHIP BETWEEN DIVINE TRADITION AND SACRED SCRIPTURE

1. Divine Tradition

Tradition comes from the Latin traditio, the noun of the verb tradere, ‘to transmit,’ ‘to deliver.’ It was a term of
ratification of Roman law. Tradere implied giving over and surrendering something to someone, passing an
object from the possession of the donor to the receiver. In Greek, paradidonai, aorist paradounai, had the same
meaning.

Taken in its basic, exact and completely general sense, tradition or transmission, is the very principle of the
whole economy of salvation. Tradition, in this sense, encloses and dominates it completely, from its very
beginning, which is none other than God; God as the word is understood in the New Testament, referring to the
Father, the absolute Origin, the uncreated Principle, the primordial Source, not only of all things visible and
invisible, but of the very divinity of the Son and the Holy Spirit, by procession. God (the Father) then gives his
Son to the world; he delivers him to the world (Rom 8:31-32; Gal 2:20; Eph 5:2,25; Jn 19:30). Thus the
economy begins by a divine transmission or tradition; it is continued in and by the men chosen and sent out by
God for that purpose. The sending of Christ and the Spirit is the foundation of the Church, bringing her into
existence as an extension of themselves.

Clement of Rome: “The apostles have been dispatched to us by the Lord Jesus Christ like the bearers of good
tidings. Jesus Christ was sent by God. Christ, therefore, comes from God, and the apostles come from Christ;
these two acts result fittingly from God's will” (Clement, Epist. I ad Cor., 42, 1-2).
6
CCC, no. 74.
7
Dei Verbum, no. 7.
8
Ibid.
9
Ibid.
10
CCC, no. 77.
4
Ignatius of Antioch, Serapion of Antioch and Tertullian made similar allusions to the fact that the divine
economy reposes on a communication descending like a cascade from God through Christ and apostles: “We
must keep what the Churches have received from the apostles, the apostles from Christ and Christ from God”
(Tertullian, Praesc. 21:4, 37:1).

Tradition is an offering by which the Father's gift is communicated to a great number of people throughout the
world, and down the successive generations, so that a multitude of people, physically separated from it by
space and time, are incorporated in the same unique, identical reality, which is the Father's gift, and above all
the saving truth, the divine Revelation made in Jesus Christ. Tradition is the sharing of a treasure, which itself
remains unchanging; it represents a victory over time and its transience, over space and the separation caused by
distance.

Indeed, if tradition is taken in its basic, strict sense, signifying transmission, or delivery, it includes the whole
communication, excluding nothing. If then we consider the content of what is offered, tradition comprises
equally the holy scriptures, and besides these, not only doctrines but things: the sacraments, ecclesiastical
institutions, the powers of the ministry, customs and liturgical rites – in fact, all the Christian realities
themselves.

THE SUBJECT OF TRADITION

‘Subject corresponds to object or content. The act of transmitting implies a content, an object; it also implies
someone who transmits, an active subject. The subject of tradition is living being who carries it and is
answerable for it: The subject of an action always bears a measure of responsibility.

Tradition may be considered at different stages: at its point of origin, when the deposit of faith was established,
and at the stage when the established deposit is communicated through time and space. There are differences
between these two stages, and yet there is a continuity. The differences are of a qualitative nature. For if the first
is one of delivery, only the second is one of actual transmission. The first stage concerns Revelation, seen as
something unique, accomplished once and for all; the second stage is not lacking in Revelation, in the sense that
a ‘spirit of Revelation’, as the New Testament calls it, the Holy Spirit, is ever active in this stage to actualize the
Word of God in the Church, but it is also filled with the active presence of what God has accomplished once
and for all at the time of the prophets, of Christ and of the apostles. These last were the subject of the tradition
that constitutes the deposit; the Church is the subject of the transmission of this deposit, which is indeed
something quite different from the passive object of a purely mechanical transmission.

The Holy Spirit, Transcendent subject of Tradition – The Holy Spirit ‘has spoken through the prophets,’ we
sing in the Creed. He was the driving force of the public mission of Jesus Christ himself, which consisted of
Revelation (Lk 3:21-22; 4:14) and salvation (Heb 9:14; Rom 1:4). It is he who animates the apostles and the
Church from within, to enable them to carry out the work with which they are entrusted. Among the works of
the Spirit the New Testament insists especially on unification and bearing witness, which appear fundamental.

The Church, visible and historical subject of Tradition – the Church is a complex organic reality. In the
writings of the Fathers and in liturgy, ecclesia (the Church) means the Christian community, with the pastors or
leaders considered first as Christian, that is, as men trying to live by the grace of God and to save their souls.
While fully aware of the juridical structure of the Church the Father do not make ecclesiology to consist in
defending and illustrating it, as was customary following the controversies of the 16 th century; the ecclesiology
elaborated by them is much more a consideration of the Christian state or way of life within the sacramental and
communal framework of the Covenant; it is a Christian anthropology based on the people of God and the Body
of Christ, founded respectively on the figurative Pasch of Mount Sinai and the true Pasch of Jerusalem.

5
The Magisterium of the hierarchy is the chief subject of tradition. The role of the Magisterium is classically
defined as keeping faithfully, judging authentically and defining infallibly the content of the deposit. The first
function of the Magisterium is one of witness; by the apostolic succession, which is evidently something more
than a material continuity sanctioned ritually, the episcopate enters into the unity of mission. Tradition, in which
a whole activity of the Church down the ages has becomes mingled with the pure transmission of the apostolic
heritage, is like a river that carries a little of everything.

Living tradition is the ‘Catholic spirit.” Living Tradition meant either the conviction expressed in all it breadth
by one's entire way of life, with emphasis placed on life in a community, or, more simply, the growth through
time of the truth entrusted to the Church, like the growth of a living plant. It is this latter interpretation that is
more adequate. Tradition is living because it is carried by living minds. Tradition is living because it resides in
minds that live by it, in a history that comprises activity, problems, doubts, opposition, new contributions and
questions that need answering.

THE MONUMENTS OR WITNESS OF TRADITION

The Word of God, which is the major source of the salvation offered to us on the basis of faith, does not reach
each man individually and directly. It reaches us by mediation and in stages. These intermediaries of the Word
are obviously not all of equal importance. First of all comes Holy Scripture, which is the measure and norm of
all the others, since it is the Word of God. St. Cyprian called ‘The Word of God’ ‘the principle and origin of
divine tradition.’ The principal witness of tradition, with the exception of the Holy Scripture and the texts of
Magisterium, in which it is best possible to reach the very soul of tradition, considered above all, as it has been,
as the living transmission of the spirit of Christianity. These witnesses are the liturgy, the Fathers and the
practice and spontaneous gestures by which the faith is expressed.

a. The Liturgy: Dom Gueranger – ‘It is in the liturgy that the Spirit who inspired the Scriptures speaks again;
the liturgy is tradition in itself at its highest degree of power and solemnity.’ Liturgy is as a means other than
writing of transmitting everything in a way that is profoundly educative; as a means, in some cases, of
transmitting something not contained formally in Scripture; and as an interpretation of the Holy Scriptures that
really brings home their meaning.

b. The Fathers of the Church: The name ‘Fathers’ refers generally to writers who were also saints, and usually
bishops, who, at a time when it was necessary to provide some foundation for Catholic thought, preached the
Church's doctrine, elaborated it, defended it and defined it against heresy.

2. Sacred Scripture

Christ is the unique Word of Sacred Scripture. Through all the words of Sacred Scripture, God speaks only one
single Word, his one Utterance in whom he expresses himself completely (Heb 1:1-3). For this reason, the
Church always venerated the Sacred Scriptures as she venerates the Lord's Body. In Sacred Scripture, the
Church constantly finds her nourishment and her strength, for she welcomes it not as a human word, ‘but as
what it really is, the word of God’ (1 Thess 2:13; cf. DV, 24).

3. The interrelationship between Tradition and Sacred Scripture

‘There close connection and communication between sacred tradition and Sacred Scripture. For both of them,
flowing from the same divine wellspring, in a certain way merge into a unity and tend toward the same end.” 11

11
Dei Verbum, no. 9.
6
Each of them in their own way “makes present and fruitful in the Church the mystery of Christ, who promised
to remain with his own ‘always to the close of the age’ (Mt 28:20).”12

Though sacred tradition and Sacred Scripture flow from the same divine wellspring, they are seen as two
distinct modes of transmission of divine revelation. (1) “Sacred Scripture is the word of God in as much as it is
consigned to writing under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.”13 While (2) sacred tradition takes the word of God
entrusted by Christ the Lord and the Holy Spirit to the Apostles, and hands it on to their successors in its full
purity, so that led by the light of the Spirit of truth, they may in proclaiming it preserve this word of God
faithfully, explain it, and make it more widely known.”14

Since sacred tradition and sacred scripture are two distinct but inseparable modes of transmission of divine
revelation, ‘it is not from sacred scripture alone that the Church draws her certainty about everything which has
been revealed. Therefore, both sacred tradition and sacred scripture are to be accepted and venerated with the
same sense of loyalty and reverence, since both of them form one sacred deposit of the word of God committed
to the Church.’15

Note: The sacred tradition comes from the apostles and hands on what they received from Jesus` teaching and
example and what they learned from the Holy Spirit. It is to be distinguished from the various theological,
disciplinary, liturgical or devotional traditions, born in the local churches over time. These are the particular
forms, adapted to different places and times in which the great Tradition is expressed.16

IV. THE NATURE OF INSPIRATION

The Latin root word of inspiration is inspirare, a compound of in and spirare, literally means, ‘breathed into.’

The meaning of term ‘divine inspiration of Scripture’ – it denotes the special influence of God upon the human
writers of the Bible, an influence of such a nature that God is said to be the author of the biblical books.

God is the author of Sacred Scripture: ‘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’ (DV 11). Inspiration
is the process by which the authors are guided by the Holy Spirit so much so that what is written down is what
the Holy Spirit wanted to be written and what the author wanted to be written. What is the relationship between
inspiration and revelation? revelation is what God has revealed; inspiration is the writing down of what God has
revealed.

1. Biblical Foundations

a. OT – The OT doesn’t itself contain a doctrine of inspiration of Scripture, but it certainly and emphatically
refers to the divine action of God upon the minds of the prophets. Sometimes it records God's commanding a
prophet to write (Ex 17:14, Is 30:8; Jer 30:2), but there is not indication of a divine influence upon the prophetic
writer that would make it appear as if God were the author of such writing. Moreover, the divine action upon
men is limited to the areas of action and of speaking and doesn’t extend to the area of writing or even of
thinking. Later on the divine origin of Scripture was gradually accepted among the Jews (1 Mac 12:9; 2 Kgs
23:1-2.

12
CCC, no. 80.
13
Dei Verbum, no. 9.
14
Ibid.
15
Ibid., nos. 9-10.
16
CCC, no. 83.
7
b. NT- the conviction of the divine origin of the Jewish sacred books is repeatedly implied or expressed in the
NT. Implicitly, Jesus employed the customary Jewish term for the totality of the sacred books, namely,
Scripture, the document par excellence. He regarded the Scripture as irrefragable, impossible to annul (Jn
10:35), authoritative and not open to question. The reason for it is that they are the Word of Go. NT writers
express the conviction that in the words of this Scripture the Holy Spirit spoke in the mouth of human beings
(Acts 1:16). Explicitly, we have two texts: (1) 2 Tim 3:16-17 (inspired by God) – “All Scripture is inspired by
God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man
of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.” And (2) 2 Pt 1:19-21 (action of the Holy Spirit) –
“We have the prophetic word made more sure…. First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of
scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation, because no prophecy eve came by the impulse of man, but
men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.”

It is the Holy Spirit who moved men to act and to speak on behalf of God. They are persons who are inspired to
lead God's people and to at on their behalf. There are two models of divine inspiration (Jewish model): (1)
Divine dictation: sacred authors wrote down what God dictated to them according to a copy that already pre-
exist. It stresses so much the role of the divine that it overshadows the human contribution. (2) Letter of God:
This model is used in pastoral or homiletical sense rather than in a technical sense. According to this model, the
apostles preached about Jesus through the process of ‘remembering,’ ‘understanding,’ and ‘witnessing.’ It gives
a good understanding of the role of human persons in God's work.

2. Fathers of the Church (Tradition) – the sacred authors as instruments of God.

Scholasticism: ‘The principal author of the Sacred Scripture is the Holy Spirit; the human person instead is its
instrumental author.” (St. Thomas Aquinas)

Clement of Alexandria wrote about the ‘sacred writings’ and the ‘holy books’, affirming that the Scriptures
were the work of ‘divine authors.’

Gregory of Lyons noted that the Scriptures are perfect because they have been given by the Word of God and
the Holy Spirit.

3. Magisterium

Council of Florence (1441): God is the author of both Old and New Testaments. It used the phrase ‘inspiration
of the Holy Spirit’ as the reason for the divine character of the Sacred Books.

Council of Trent (1562): the numbers of books considered inspired, and therefore canonical (not canonical,
therefore, they are inspired). In this manner the Protestants differed from the Catholics. The Catholics
considered all the Books found in the Vulgate; all the OT writings in the Septuagint and all the NT books,
inspired and canonical; whereas the Protestants considered only the OT books found in the Hebrew Canon of
Scripture to be inspired. The Holy Spirit guides the Church not only in writing down of the Scriptures but also
in the formula, preservation and handing down of the divine Tradition.

Vatican Council I – Leo XIII`s Providentissimus Deus, and Pius XII`s Divino Afflante Spiritu: ‘Inspiration is a
supernatural impulse by means of which the Holy Spirit excited and moved the sacred writers to write and
helped them while they wrote in such a way that they could conceive exactly, wished to report faithfully and
expressed with infallible accuracy, all that God commanded them to write and nothing else.’ According to DAS,
the sacred author in act of composing his book, is a living and rational instrument of the Holy Spirit.

Vatican Council II: inspiration is a specific way of speaking about the unique sacred character of the Scriptures,
having important implications for the way in which the OT and NT books are to be regarded by believers. Holy
8
Mother Church, relying on the belief of the apostles, holds that the books of both OT and NT in their entirety,
with all their parts, are sacred and canonical because, having been written under the inspiration of the Holy
Spirit; they have God as their author and have been handed on as such to the Church herself. In composing the
sacred books, God chose men and while employed by him they made use of their powers and abilities, so with
him acting in them and through them, they, as true authors, consigned to writing everything and only those
things which He wanted. Therefore, since everything asserted by the inspired authors or sacred writers must be
held to the asserted by the Holy Spirit, it follows that the books of Scripture must be acknowledged as teaching
firmly, faithfully, and without error that truth which God wanted put into the sacred writings for the sake of
salvation. (DV 11)

4. Theological discourse

Divine dictation (or verbal inspiration) – God communicated to the hagiographer (human writer of Scripture)
not only the ideas but also the words or verbal expression of Scripture. Hagiographer acted only as a secretary.
Proponents are Jerome, Justine the Martyr, Dominic Banez (OP), Lagrage (OP).

“God the Author” (or formal inspiration) – God is the ultimate the source of both Testaments but literary
authorship may not necessarily be ascribed to Him. The thoughts and ideas (formal part) of Scripture come from
God, but the composition and the verbal expressions (material part) come from hagiographer. ‘Author’ also
means the one who conceived the idea, or originator. The proponents are Augustine, Ambrose, Franzelin (SJ).

Condescension – The Holy Spirit ‘illuminated’ the inspired writer with an action directed to human mind, will
and memory. Personality of the hagiographer temporarily lost. Proponents are Origen and Greeks.

Prophetic theory through the Aristotelian notion of Efficient Causality – The Holy Spirit is the principle
efficient cause, the hagiographer is the instrumental efficient cause. There is the distinct but conjoined role
between the two. Proponent was Thomas Aquinas.

Prophetic theory in terms of plenary verbal inspiration – Everything great or small has been edited by the
sacred authors at the dictation of the Holy Spirit. Proponents are Melchor Cano (OP), the reformers and the
counter reformers.

Subsequent approbation – Some of Biblical books were written by purely human means, their inspiration
consisting in their afterwards being approved by the Church. Proponent is D. Haneberg.

Negative assistance – The Holy Spirit acted upon the hagiographers only to prevent them from falling into
error. Apart from this he exercised no other influence. Proponents are Lessius (SJ), Bonfrere and J. Jahn. Jahn
made inspiration the equivalent of the charism of infallibility.

WHAT INSPIRATION IS NOT: (1) divine dictation which makes the hagiographer a mere secretary,
mechanically writing down whatever is dictated from on high; (2) negative assistance by the Holy Spirit who
only sees to it that the outcome is infallible writing; (3) the subsequent approval by the Church which makes the
Scriptures inspired; (4) only directed the intellect of man as to what are to be written down but also to his
affective and psychomotor faculties; (5) concerned only faith and morals but it extends to both religious and
profane matters; (6) identified with nor does it result from total inerrancy.

IMPORTANT PRINCIPLES ON INSPIRATION: (1) the books of the Bible do not have only one author.
Authorship may extend also to transmitters of revelation – writers, redactors, editors; (2) charism of Biblical
inspiration is not an isolated charism; (3) communitarian dimension of inspiration – the actual writing of
Scriptures was (a) born from the faith of, (b) was directed to, (c) was connected with the other charisms of, (d)
was normative for the life of the community.
9
CONSEQUENCES OF BIBLICAL INSPIRATION: (1) revelation of God in Scriptures – because Scripture
is inspired, we find there God's self-disclosure; (2) unity – there is a basic unity among the different writings
because of its single principal originating source, God himself; (3) Completeness – the Bible contains all that
God willed to reveal of himself in the written from for our salvation. But it is not complete as regards
interpretation; (4) sacramentality – the Bible offers man opportunity to encounter God in Christ; (5) Inerrancy –
the Bible free from error as regards to what it teaches about God and salvation; (6) canonicity – the list of books
that form the Bible.

V. THE INTERPRETATION OF SACRED SCRIPTURE

In sacred scripture, God speaks to man in a human way. To interpret Scripture correctly, the reader must be
attentive to what the human authors truly wanted to affirm, and to what God wanted to reveal to us by their
words. In order to discover the sacred authors` intention, the reader must take into account the conditions of
their time and culture, the literary genres in use at that time, and the modes of feeling, speaking and narrating
then current.

But since the Sacred Scripture is inspired, there is another and no less important principle of correct
interpretation. ‘Sacred Scripture must be read and interpreted in the light of the same Spirit by whom it was
written’ (DV 12). Vatican II indicates three criteria for interpreting Scripture in accordance with the Spirit who
inspired it: (1) Be especially attentive to the content and unity of the whole Scripture – “Scripture is a unity by
reason of the unity of God's plan, of which Christ Jesus is the center and heart, open since his Passover; (2)
Read the Scripture within the ‘living Tradition’ of the whole Church.’ According to the saying of the Fathers,
Sacred Scripture is written principally in the Church's heart rather than in documents and records; (3) Be
attentive to the analogy of faith. By ‘analogy of faith’ we mean the coherence of the truths of faith among
themselves and within the whole plan of Revelation.

The common relationship of Tradition, Scripture to the Church and Magisterium: (1) Sacred Tradition and
Sacred Scripture form one deposit of the word of God, committed to the Church; (2) the task of authentically
interpreting Scripture and Tradition ‘was entrusted solely to the living teaching office (Magisterium) of the
Church, which exercises this authority in the name of Jesus Christ. But Magisterium is subordinate to the word
of God, bound to listen to it and transmit it faithfully; (3) this teaching office is not above the word of God, but
serves it, teaching only what has been handed on, listening to it devoutly, guarding it scrupulously and
explaining it faithfully in accord with a divine commission and with the help of the Holy Spirit; it draws from
this one deposit of faith everything it presents for belief as divinely revealed; (4) it is clear, therefore, that
Sacred Tradition, Sacred Scripture and the teaching authority of the Church, in accord with God's most wise
design, are so linked and joined together that one cannot stand without the others, and that all together and each
in its own way under the action of the Holy Spirit contribute effectively to the salvation of souls.

THE SENSES OF SCRIPTURE

According to an ancient tradition, one can distinguish between two senses of Scripture: (1) the literal sense – the
meaning conveyed by the words of Scripture and discovered by exegesis, following the rules of sound
interpretation: all other sense of Sacred Scripture are based on the literal (Thomas Aquinas) and (2) spiritual
sense, which is subdivided into: (a) allegorical sense – we can acquire a more profound understanding of events
by recognizing their significance in Christ; (b) the moral sense – the events reported in Scripture ought to lead
us to act justly; (c) the analogical sense – we can view realities and events in terms of their eternal significance,
leading us toward our true homeland.

CANONICITY

10
It was by the apostolic Tradition that the Church discerned which writings are to be included in the list of the
sacred books. This complete list is called the canon of Scripture. It includes 46 books for the OT (45 if we count
Jeremiah and Lamentations as one) and 27 for the NT.

The OT is an indispensable part of Sacred Scripture. Its books are divinely inspired and retain a permanent
value for the Old Covenant has never been revoked. The books of the OT bear witness to the whole divine
pedagogy of God's saving love. Christian venerates the OT as true Word of God. The Church has always
vigorously opposed the idea of rejecting the OT under the pretext that the New has rendered it void
(Marcionism).

‘The Word of God, which is the power of God for salvation to everyone who has faith, is set forth and displays
its power in a most wonderful way in the writings of the NT, which hand on the ultimate truth of God's
Revelation. Their central object is Jesus Christ, God's incarnate Son. The Gospels are the heart of all the
Scriptures because they are our principal source for the life and teaching of the Incarnate Word, our Savior.’

We can distinguish three stages in the formation of the Gospels: (1) The life and teaching of Jesus; (2) the oral
tradition; (3) the written Gospels. The fourfold Gospel holds a unique place in the Church, as it evident both in
the veneration which the liturgy accords it and in the surpassing attraction it has exercised on the saints at all
times.

VI. THE VARIOUS APPROACHES TO THE UNDERSTANDING OF INSPIRATION AND TO

BIBLICAL HERMENEUTICS

In other denominations, especially among the Protestants, the Word of God is found only in the Sacred
Scriptures. For us Catholics, the Word of God is not only found in the Scriptures, but also in the living Tradition
of the Church and the Church's Magisterium. If the Sacred Scripture is not understood, that Tradition helps, if
still not understandable, we appeal to the Magisterium.

Hermeneutics etymology – it comes from the Greek word hermeneuein, which means ‘to interpret’. This word
is related to Hermes of the Greek Pantheon. It is equivalent in Latin ‘god mercury.’ Hermeneutics can be
understood in a broad way or in a narrow sense. Broadly speaking, it means the art and science of interpretation
of the Bible. It deals with the condition that makes understanding possible and even with the process of
understanding as a whole. It encompasses the three steps process of (1) exegesis, (2) synthesis, (3) and
application to life. In the narrow meaning, hermeneutics refer to the methods and techniques used to interpret
written texts. Hermeneutics is the process of careful and analytical study of biblical passages to produce a useful
interpretation. Hermeneutics in strict sense is restricted only to the application of the exegesis to present life. It
is therefore distinct from exegesis, which is the process of drawing out the true meaning from the scriptural text
itself. Hermeneutics is necessary for knowing the meaning intended by God through the Word of human author.
It serves as the bridge between Bible and life.

Since Bible is a ‘past document’, it should be understood as the author wanted it to be understood. It was the
Spirit who inspires the authors as the sacred texts and it is the same Spirit, who will continue to interpret the
Sacred Scripture.

To the past (Historical-Critical method) or Diachronic: (1) Source Criticism – the writers usually made use of
sources and previous materials. Source criticism determines the presence of sources in our present texts. It
investigates where the sources came from, how they were used and what they meant then and mean now in the
present use of the text; (2) Form criticism – this method aims at discovering the different literary genres in the
text and then establishes the historical situations that give birth to them or were connected to these genres; (3)
Traditional criticism – the different literary genre didn’t exist in a vacuum. They developed according to the
flow of the historical situations where they were included. Traditional criticism situates texts and literary genres
11
in the stream of tradition and attempts to describe the development of this tradition over the course of time; (4)
Redaction criticism – in redaction criticism, we seek to trace how the author connected the different individual
genres and why he put them in such and such a relationship.

To the present (new methods of literary analysis) or synchronic studies: the synchronic methods take the text as
it is and study it as it now stands. It includes the following: (1) Canonical approach – The Word of God is the
Bible as we have it now, and the Bible as a whole. Any part of it therefore will have to be read and studied in
the context of the whole. Canonical approach reacts against placing an exaggerated value upon what is
supposed to be original and early, as if his alone is authentic. Inspired Scripture has been recognized by the
Church as the rule of faith. Hence, the significance, in this light, both the final form in which each of the books
of the Bible appears and of the complete whole which all together make up the Canon. Each individual book
only becomes biblical in the light of the Canon as a whole; (2) Rhetorical analysis – Rhetoric is the art of
composing discourse aimed at persuasion. This method invites the reader's personal interpretation so that the
complete meaning can merge, formed by the reaction between the reader and the text; (3) Narrative analysis –
narrative exegesis offers a method of undertaking to the form of story and personal testimony something
characteristics of Holy Scripture and of course, a fundamental modality of communication between human
persons; (4) Structuralism – this is based on the concept of reality that in all things there are inner structures that
can be discovered. Once we get these inner structures, we are able to go to the deep meaning of reality, a
meaning that is universal; (5) Semiotic analysis – it is based on three main principles: (a) the principle of
immanence – each text forms a unit of meaning complete in itself; (b) the principle of the structure of meaning
– there is no meaning given in and through relationship in particular the relationship of difference; (c) the
principle of the grammar of the text – each text follows a grammar, that is to say, a certain number of rules or
structures.

VII. THE INTERRELATIONSHIP OF THE OT AND NT

The two tradition have the following common elements: (1) both are living traditions – they came from the life
of the community of faith and now exert an influence over it; (2) both are passed on in two forms: oral and
written; (3) both have the characteristic of stability and growth. However, there are also differences: (1) the OT
tradition is based on the promised divine intervention. This tradition awaits the culmination of God's
interventions for his people at the coming of the Messiah. The NT tradition already believes that this
culmination has come in Jesus the Messiah. It awaits the final manifestation of the glory it new enjoys; (2) since
OT is still awaiting the culmination, it is provisional in character. The NT tradition on the other hand has
definitive character. The OT promises while the NT fulfills; (3) in the Judaic tradition, prophesy has ceased.
The prophets have been substituted by the experts of the law. In the NT, even after the death of the apostles, the
influence of the Risen Christ and the Paraclete continues to guide the Church. Hence primacy is to be given to
the Spirit rather that to the experts. The Church is guided by the Magisterium and not by the scholars.

The Church, as early as apostolic times, and then constantly in her Tradition, has illuminated the unity of the
divine plan in the two Testaments through Typology, which discerns in God's works of the Old Covenant
prefiguration of what he accomplished in the fullness of time in the person of his incarnate Son. Christians,
therefore, read the OT in the light of Christ crucified and risen. But it must not make us forget that the OT
retains its own intrinsic value as Revelation reaffirmed by our Lord himself (Mk 12:29-31). Besides, the NT has
to be read in the light of the Old – the NT lies hidden in the Old and the OT is unveiled in the New. In short, the
unity of the two Testaments proceeds from the unity of God's plan and his revelation. The OT prepares for the
New, and the NT fulfills the Old; the two shed light on each other; both are true Word of God.

12