Prima Pars
4. Scripture, Tradition and the Nature of Faith: Vatican I, Chapters 2-3
Class of 2005-12-15
https://berquistcourse.com/course/theology/10-prima-pars/004-scripture-tradition-and-the-nature-of-faith-vatican-i-chapters/

[0:00] Now in part three he goes to the two sources of what revelation right this is a common thing picked up in Vatican II and so on now this supernatural revelation this supernatural unveiling right according to the belief of the universal church as declared by the Sacred Council of Trent right which is the ecumenical council the last one at the time of Vatican I right

[0:33] is contained in written books and sacred scripture and unwritten what traditions right which were received by the apostles from the lips of Christ himself or came to the apostles by the dictation of the Holy Spirit and were passed on as it were from hand to hand until they what reached us huh

[1:00] so not everything we believe or is supernaturally revealed, is through the what sacred scriptures huh some have been passed down by tradition okay then he goes down to a particular consideration of one of these two sacred scripture and refers us back to the Council of Trent I guess the complete books of the Old and the New Testament which with all their parts as they are listed in the decree of the said Council that's the Council of Trent right and as they are found in the Old Latin Vulgate edition are to be received as sacred and what canonical right I think Pope Pius XII there when they said that the Vulgate is free of error right they meant free of doctrinal error right they don't mean

[1:54] that in every case the translation was the best possible translation of the text right but that the use of the Vulgate by the church fathers etc and the doctors the church showed it was free of doctrinal error right There wasn't anybody astray by translating the text in heretical fashion right But it doesn't mean you couldn't sometimes you know improve a translation or a word there or something like that

[2:25] I was like I was reading Saint Paul this morning and I think the Greek was Philadelphia and it's one word in Greek right and then in the Latin they had it the the charity of brotherhood well the same meaning you know but in Greek it's one word right Philadelphia we get the word Adelphos and brother and philos brotherly love they translated a couple words you know you know had to do so honestly no it's a number of places like they were doing that one of my editions has the Latin on one side and the and the Greek on the other side.

[3:05] Okay. Now, why the Church considers them as sacred and canonical? These books the Church holds to be sacred and canonical, not because she subsequently approved them by her authority after they had been composed by unaided human skill, not simply because they contain revelation without error, but because, being written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, they have God as their author, and we're as such committed to the Church.

[3:41] So it's teaching there that the Holy Spirit is the what? Chief author, right? And the the human authors are, as it were, instruments, right?

[3:55] Which doesn't deny just something of the of the instrument in the way that they they speak, right? That some of the, or in Hebrew and some in Greek, right? Okay. I

[4:13] want to take a little break here before we kind of running. So let's look at the last paragraph here now in the second chapter. To whom it belongs to judge of the true sense, interpretation, of sacred scripture? Now, since the decree on the interpretation of holy scripture, profitably made by the Council of Trent with the intention of constraining rash speculation, has been wrongly interpreted by some, we renew that decree and declare its meaning to be as follows: that in matters of faith and morals, belonging as they do to the establishing of Christian doctrine, that meaning of holy scripture must be held to be the true one, which Holy Mother Church held and holds, since it is her right to judge of the true meaning and interpretation

[5:09] of holy scripture. In consequence, it is not permissible for anyone to interpret holy scripture in a sense contrary to this, or indeed against unanimous consent of the fathers. And I don't know if that's followed, you know, by all contemporary scriptural scholars by any means. Okay, let's look at the canons here now, and their anathemas.

[5:39] The first canon: If anyone says that the one true God, our Creator and Lord, cannot be known with certainty from the things that have been made by the natural light of human reason, let him be anathema. So it's now an article of faith that God can be known from his effects from creatures with certitude, by human reason. Which doesn't mean that it's easy or that most people, whoever gets to that stage, right?

[6:18] But it is what an article of faith that it is possible to know him right with certitude from creatures. But now, if anyone says that it is impossible or not expedient that human beings should be taught by means of divine revelation about God and the worship that should be shown to him, that can be anathema, right? And of course, that could apply even to those things that what can be known by natural reason, right?

[6:56] Because so few would know them, and after so much time and with such a mixture of error and so on. Okay, so you want to avoid the heresy of denying that it can be known by natural reason, right? But at the same time, not be ignorant of how what difficult it is, right? And the need for divine revelation, because of the few that would know it, in just a long time, and with so much error.

[7:34] And I'm always reminding of those words of Augustine there in the Treatise of the Trinity. You know, he speaks of those with an immature and perverse love of reason, right? And perverse love of reason, I think, is not loving reason for the right end or goal, right? But I think immature, right? People who think that you know their reason is free to what judge all things, right?

[8:03] And not aware of the all the aids and help that reason needs because it's so apt to to make mistakes, huh? I told you I had a sabbatical one time which I was devoting to mistakes and the causes of mistakes, you know, and so on. When you when you kind of see the whole thing kind of laid out there, you know, you you realize that gee whiz, we're going to be falling into mistakes any more, you know.

[8:32] It reminds me of this guy, you know. I went to a psychiatrist and he was saying, "After you study all these mental ailments, you know, everybody around you seems to be, you know, right right on the edge, you know. Everybody looks very unstable, you know. I don't know if that's true, but maybe it's true for most of us are close. But as far as making mistakes, it's so close, and because if you're a logician, right?

[9:08] I used to put on the the four forms of if-then speech, right? Two of which are syllogism and the two are not. I used to begin that part of logic getting four students up to the board, you know, to each ones, and sometimes you get a perfect example because the ones who had the valid ones thought they were invalid, and the ones who had the invalid ones thought they were valid.

[9:32] So it four mistakes right in front of you, spontaneously, you know, from four students taken up on the front rows or whatever they were. See how apt the human mind is to make mistakes, right? Now I was mentioning, you know, how I taught the students the four senses of before, right? And talking about the mistake for mixing up the sense of word, and I said, now later on the course, you all make the mistake of mixing up these senses of before, and sure enough, they do.

[10:03] But they ask them, you know, which is better to breathe or to philosophize? And they all say to breathe is better than to philosophize. But then you ask them why? It's because to breathe is before philosophizing in the second sense of before, and they're concluding therefore it's before in the fourth sense. So they're mixing up the second and the fourth sense. I told you you do it.

[10:26] So even after you've been instructed as to what the meanings are, and told, you know, I remember sometimes you know saying to students, "Now, you get the point? Oh, yeah, we all got it." Okay. I say, now on the final exam, I will ask this, and somebody will be mistaken about it again. Oh no, no, no! Now we see it. Now we see it. Sure enough, something went wrong.

[10:52] Came into the things mixed up. You realize how how apt the human mind is to what to fail, huh? To mistake, even about things that are you know closer than than than this, huh? People just lack common sense. They lack they lack any any experience of the weakness of human mind.

[11:21] Now the third one is referring now more to the supernatural knowledge, itself. If anyone says that a human being cannot be divinely elevated to a knowledge and perfection which exceeds the natural, but of himself can and must must reach finally the possession of all truth and goodness by continual development, let him be anathema. Right?

[11:54] Again, it's touching upon that immature and perverse love of reason. Huh? Reason is self sufficient, right? To reach all these things, but also this, you know, the thought that you can't be raised above, huh? And then, in particular, about one part of revelation there found in the scriptures. If anyone does not receive the sacred and canonical, the complete books of sacred scripture with all their parts, as the Holy Council of Trent listed them, I suppose one reason why the Council of Trent listed them was because Luther and others had what tried to exclude certain other books, or denies that they were divinely inspired.

[12:36] Let him be what anathema. Right? The revelation is on the side of what God, the Holy Spirit, right? Now the next chapter is on our reception of this on the side of us on faith.

[12:59] Now the first little part here is the two reasons why we are obligated to have faith in God revealing. Since human beings are totally dependent on God as their Creator and Lord, and created reason is completely subject to uncreated truth. We are obliged to yield to God, the Revealer, full submission of intellect and will by faith. How's the Adoro te devote, latens deitas, quae sub his figuris vere latitas; tibi se cor meum totum subicit, quia te contemplans totum deficit.

[13:45] Okay, but I think I think heart there, you know, can include both the reason and the will, right? In other words, God exceeds the ability of our reason and our will, so we have to subordinate it to Him. But

[14:01] you know, people talk so much about their body belonging to them and so on nowadays. But but really, to whom do you belong, really? Where God was. Well, I mean, to argue from from things that we know, huh? We've got laws about. um

[14:21] uh You know, if I write a book or an article, I get the copyright to that book. right? It's mine. It belongs to me, right? You can't, you know, reproduce that book without, you know, my permission or something like that. It belongs to me, right? But what I write, you know, is partly from my teachers and partly from what everybody knows, and so it's not all mine, really.

[14:51] But I claim to have it all mine, right? But when God, it's everything, right? So don't we belong more to God than that book belongs to me?

[15:04] Well, the state the state tells you what you do with your body. Yeah, you can't take certain drugs. You can't. Yeah. You know, do certain things. Yeah. Yeah, yeah. Really, if you stop and think, your mind and your will really belong to God, not to you. They belong to you in some sense, and they belong more to Him than to you. So I belong to myself. It's kind of a startling discovery.

[15:34] I suppose I belong somewhat to my wife, right? And to some extent, your children belong to you, right? Okay. But I belong more to God than to my wife, and my children belong more to God than to me, right? I suppose some sense which you can speak of belonging in human affairs, but but.

[16:09] So if you don't accept that dependence, you know, Karl Marx says, you know, Karl Marx admits that, right? That if if someone else is the source of my being, right, He owed him my life, and everything, then I'm completely dependent upon him, right? And so what Karl Marx tries to do is try to say that man has made himself, and that man by transforming the world around him, you know, transforms himself.

[16:35] And therefore, if I made myself, I don't have to ask who made me. I made myself. But at least he's admitting, you know, that if I was made by God, right, that I would be completely dependent upon Him. At least he has that clarity, right? But these people, you know,

[16:54] I mentioned how Sartre, you know, says, you know, that you know we're not atheistic in the sense that we, you know, exhaust ourselves by trying to prove he didn't exist. But we're atheistic in the sense that that doesn't make any difference to us whether he does or doesn't. You know. Well, that seems to me, you know, pride. You know.

[17:16] Okay. Okay, now it comes to the the very nature of faith, huh? Okay, the definition of faith. And first of all, you have the statement of the definition by the council itself.

[17:34] Now, this faith, which is the beginning of human salvation, notice we were talking earlier on the board we had on here, talking about the importance of the beginning, right? Nothing is more necessary.

[17:48] So, to lose the faith, in some sense, is worse than to lose what hope or charity, because it can be, to some extent, though imperfect, without them, but they can't be without it at all. So, if you lose faith, you lose everything. So, faith is the beginning of human salvation, huh? The Catholic Church professes it to be a what supernatural virtue, huh? So, it's a quality, right?

[18:20] Different species of quality, habit or disposition, by means of which, with the grace of God inspiring and assisting us, we believe to be true what He has revealed, not because we perceive its intrinsic truth by the natural light of reason, huh? But because of the authority of God Himself, who makes the revelation and can neither deceive nor be deceived, huh? So, it's different then in believing a what human teacher who can both deceive and be deceived, huh?

[19:06] And then he goes to like in other places we've seen the biblical statement, the definition, huh? When Thomas takes up the definition of faith, you go to the same text there in the Epistle to the Hebrews, huh?

[19:22] And I would check, you know, English translations of the Bible. I always go to this definition there and see how they translated that. And some of them, you know, translated it as the evidence of what is not seen. You know, which is kind of a contradiction almost in words. You know, yeah. And some days they'll translate substance as assurance of things hoped for was not exactly the way of translating it.

[19:50] Substance is more the sense of a foundation, huh? Okay. For faith is the apostle again. that's how he's referred to by antonomasia there, right? Rather than Saint Paul, he's called the apostle, apostle of the Gentiles.

[20:10] Ah. Faith is, as the apostle testifies, the substance of things hoped for. And now, argumentum is the what? Way the Latins translate the Greek word is actually elenchos huh, and it's kind of striking at first when you see that because a elenchos means refutation originally in in the Greek philosophy, but at least in Aristotle the book on sophistical refutations elenchos. But I think it's the sense more of what the conviction, okay, of what is not seen, right?

[20:51] That you're convinced by what is to assent to what is not seen. That's the meaning of it. It's not argument in the sense of a argument. Okay, faith declares the apostle as the substance. there. there's a little misspelling there. The substance of things hoped for is kind of a foundation of things hoped for, right? And what's hoped for is the beatific what vision, right? Eternal life. When Thomas sometimes is going to divide the articles of faith according to the what humanity and the divinity of Christ, he'll go and quote the definition of eternal life in the 17th chapter, I think it is, of St.

[21:37] John's Gospel, where Christ says, "Eternal life is to know what you, right, and him whom you have sent, right." And so that's one way of saying that it's good to know the divinity of Christ and the humanity of Christ, and then he divides articles of faith, either six or seven articles on the divinity and six articles on the what humanity, right? Okay.

[22:06] Sometimes he divides into seven, sometimes into six. So you have the the incarnation, and the the death of our Lord, right? Descended to hell, resurrection, ascension, second coming—those six. And then there's six ways divided according to divinity. There's a couple ways of doing it. Okay.

[22:31] Um. So it says the substance of things hoped for is kind of like a foundation, right? Now we're talking before of how there's two revelations, right? There's revelation that corresponds to faith, right? Which is not a complete revelation because you don't see God as He is, right? You don't see Him face to face, huh? But what you hope for is to see Him face to face, right?

[22:56] But this partial revelation that we accept by faith, to which corresponds to faith, is in a way a foundation for what we're going to see later on face to face, huh? And so, if eternal life is to see Him as He is and Him whom He has sent, then faith. Is believing both of those right, but not really seeing them fully? Yeah. Okay. That's why I said the substance of things hoped for, right?

[23:26] But also, he says hoped for. You have a reference to what the will, right? And the will is going to move us to our assent here. Okay. Although the the virtue in reason itself helps reason to what follow the movement of the will, but the will is moved by divine grace, huh? And moves reason to assent to these things, huh? But it's more sweet for reason to assent to it because it's got the gift of what faith, huh?

[23:57] Okay. But it's it's assent to faith is meritorious, right? Because assent is free, huh? Okay. Reason is not forced to assent, huh? But it's moved by the will, which is moved by divine grace to assent. To it now, the

[24:27] reasonable service of faith, huh? Okay, the service of faith is reasonable. Now, first thing it says why God joins external signs of His revelation to the internal aids of the Holy Spirit. Well, it's in our that this might not be contrary to reason, right? Might be in harmony with reason, because grace shouldn't go against nature, but elevate it, huh? So supernatural, above the natural, doesn't mean against the natural.

[25:02] Super doesn't mean contra. Okay. Nevertheless, in order that the submission of our faith should be in accordance with reason, it was God's will that there should be linked to the internal assistance of the Holy Spirit external indications of His revelation. That is to say, divine acts, huh?

[25:30] And first and foremost, miracles and what prophecies, right? Which clearly demonstrating as they do the omnipotence and infinite knowledge of God, huh? I suppose the miracles more the omnipotence, right? And prophecies, future contingent things, that reveal the infinite knowledge of God. Are the most certain signs of revelation, and are suited to the understanding of all because they're more what sensible signs, right? I was mentioning, you know, how that great Hilary of Poitiers, right, coming in as a Greek philosopher, right, and picking up the Bible, you know, and seeing what Moses asking God, who should I say sent me?

[26:21] You know, what's your name? And God says, "I am who I'm." Right. That's a mode of credibility, right? This impressed Hilary, right? But the average guy wouldn't maybe see this so well, right? Okay. Um.

[26:40] So, since the the basic road is the road from the senses into reason, right? These miracles that can be sensed, right, or these prophecies that are fulfilled in time, but something can be sensed, right, would be what

[26:57] for for most men, right? That's why I think it says and suited to the understanding of all, right? So there are many modes of credibility that might strike the philosopher, but not the everyman, right? But these ones very much so, right?

[27:18] So then it. Goes down to the presence of such signs in Moses and the prophets, and in Christ and the apostles. Huh. Hence, Moses and the prophets, and especially Christ, our Lord Himself, worked many absolutely clear miracles and delivered prophecies. While the apostles, we read, this at the end of the Gospel of what Mark, and they went forth and preached everywhere, while the Lord worked with them and confirmed the message by the signs that attended them.

[27:55] Okay. Again, it is written, "We have the prophetic word made more sure. You will do well to pay attention to this, as to a lamp shining in a dark place. " That's one of the epistles of Peter. Huh.

[28:13] Our author here didn't see that, I don't think. Okay. So the church says it's not a what, caecus ascensus right? A blind ascent, huh? Okay. But nevertheless, it is a what, free, huh? Okay.

[28:34] So you have the internal aid of the Holy Spirit, and they are what, partly in reason itself, right? Because, faith is a habitus, right? A habit, a disposition of the reason itself, huh? And by it, one is disposed to follow the lead of the will, right? But the will is also assisted by divine grace to move the reason to assent to the articles of faith. Huh? So you have both in the will, and in the reason itself, internal aids to believing, right?

[29:11] Okay. But then you have the external helps, right? Which are the miracles and the prophecies fulfilled, right? Okay. So it goes on to say now that although the ascent of faith is by no means a blind movement of the mind, right? It's not caecus ascensus. Yet it's not sufficient, right? Those exterior signs, huh? Okay.

[29:52] Yet no one can accept the gospel preaching in the way that is necessary for achieving salvation without both the inspiration, right? And that's more in the will, I suppose, huh? And the illumination, which is more in the reason, of the Holy Spirit, who gives to all facility in accepting and believing in the truth. huh? And Fr Boulay when he was. Talking about these things there, at the vault, he used to take the example, you know, from Carter Newman, right, and how before his conversion, he found certain things difficult to believe that the Roman Catholic Church taught, but after his conversion, they all all of a sudden became easier for him to accept.

[30:41] Yeah, but that's a facility in accepting and believing the truth that the Spirit gives you, right? And so faith in itself, even though it may not work through charity, huh? Okay, this is what we call unformed faith, right? Huh? Is nevertheless a gift of God, right? Huh? And its operation is a work belonging to the order of salvation, in that a person yields true obedience to God himself when he accepts and collaborates with his grace, which he could have rejected as though a free act.

[31:29] Now, what part three here? What things should be believed by faith? Wherefore, by divine and Catholic faith, all those things are to be believed which are contained in the Word of God, as found in Scripture and Tradition, and which are proposed by the Church as matters to be believed as divinely revealed. And I mix the distinction here, which some people don't want to make, whether or by her solemn judgment, right, when is proceeding or declaring ex cathedra, right?

[32:04] So if you read, you know, ones we're more familiar with the recent ones like the Assumption, right, and Pius XII or the Immaculate Conception, I guess Pio Nono, right? Um, you know, it's very clear, you know, that whoever doesn't accept this is suffered what shipwreck, ship shipwreck of faith, huh? Okay. But also in her ordinary and universal magisterium, right? So when the Church has continuously taught something, right, even without saying, you know, saying ex cathedra, that's also something to be what believed, huh?

[32:40] Okay, and that's often neglected nowadays, huh? Okay. Back to the paragraph before. what was your comment about charity? That is a little crazy, even though it may not work through charity. Yeah. In other words, what they call unformed faith, right? Oh, yeah. Okay. Faith that is not formed by charity, huh? Even that unformed faith is a gift of God, right? Okay. And something pertaining to the supernatural order, huh?

[33:16] Okay. But then, when it's formed by faith, it's more perfect, huh? Okay. Well, Saint Paul says, you know, charity believes all, hopes all, right? But that's a more perfect faith that has been formed by by charity, huh? Okay. You know, there's a lot of problem there. You know, that's where where Luther got off, right? Because he doesn't make see the distinction, right? And the faith that saves is the faith that is formed by charity, huh?

[33:48] And you know, Thomas, you know, will be very precise here when he gets into what it is to believe God, to believe in God, right? And the phrase "to believe in God" means what? To tend by faith to God, and that's a faith that is what formed by charity, huh? When Thomas talks sometimes about the the three virtues, the three theological virtues, um,

[34:16] and and which is is greater. Right, huh? Of course, Saint Paul is very clear that charity is the greatest of the three, right? Which is greater, hope or faith, right? Well, I think you could answer that hope is greater, right? But when Thomas distinguishes the three, he says, "By faith, we know the end, in some way, right? That's why it's necessary, right? Because we're directed to an end that surpasses the grasp of our reason, right?

[34:44] So we have to know about this end in some way, uh, in order to what pursue it, right? Okay. So by faith, we know the end. By what hope, we tend towards the end, right? And by charity, in a way, we are what? We possess it in some way. Yeah, we're, united to the end, right? So it's obviously good to know the end, but better to tend towards it, and even better to be what united with it, right?

[35:17] You know, I used to sometimes, you know, contrast Saint Thérèse of Lisieux with with Augustine a little bit, you know, for the male female difference. But the beautiful passage there at the end of her life there in Saint Thérèse of Lisieux, where she says, "I don't know what more I can have in heaven than I have now." She says, "Because our our union," she says, "is already complete."

[35:39] I say, I can't imagine Augustine saying that. You know, because Augustine says the vision is the whole reward, right? What more can I have? I'm sure she knows this too, but I mean, as far as what the union of charity is already complete, you know, it's kind of amazing things she says that. Um, but that's why charity will remain in next life, right? Maybe to be even more perfect, but charity will remain.

[36:03] But faith and hope will be replaced by the vision of him as he is, and by the firmness of that. So faith and hope have something imperfect about them, right? But charity, you're already tending towards God, right? And von Balthasar used to be very good about that too, you know. Going back to the difference that you and Aristotle pointed out between reason and will, right? That the the good is in things, right?

[36:32] Right, truth is primarily in the mind, huh? So the will moves towards God as he is in himself, right? But reason doesn't yet attain God as he is in himself by faith. It's not until the beatific vision that you'll see God as he is. Um, and then your your your love of him will be even greater, right? Okay. But already in this life, if we if we really have charity, we love God as he is.

[37:03] Okay, we don't see him as he is yet. Okay, so in some way, you could say that the will is more proportioned to God than reason is, huh? And therefore, it's part of the reason why God moves the reason through the will in this life, huh? The reason is moved by the will to assent to these things, huh? But that shows, in a sense, what that the will is more proportioned to God than reason, huh?

[37:34] And I suppose we'll go back to that simple example there that everybody knows of. Augustine is supposed to have been walking along the seashore, trying to understand the Trinity, right? And he sees this little boy who's running down to the ocean and getting some water and putting it in a little hole he's dug in the ground. And Augustine says, "What are you doing? " He's distracted by this boy.

[37:53] He says, "Well, I'm putting the ocean in into this hole. " Augustine says, "You can't get the ocean into that hole, you know. " And the little boy says, "Well, neither can you get the Trinity into your mind. " And then the boy is supposed to have disappeared, right? You know, like this thing. Well, in a sense, you can't put the ocean into yourself very well, but you can jump into the ocean, right?

[38:16] Okay, and that's the way love goes. It goes into the the thing loved, right? I left my heart in San Francisco, right? Okay. And Christ says, "Where your treasure is, there your heart shall be, " right? Huh? So the will, you're able to go into God as He is in Himself, then you are able to put God into your mind, huh? So because the will is more proportioned to God, that's one of the reasons why God moves the reason through the will in the act of faith, huh?

[38:49] Okay. Now the the very important thing here, and this is something people don't like to point out sometimes today. Without faith, it is impossible to please God. This is from Saint Paul in the Epistle of Hebrews, and reach the fellowship of his sons and daughters.

[39:18] It follows that no one can ever achieve justification without it. Neither can any one attain eternal life unless he or she perseveres in it to the end. That's very strong, huh?

[39:38] Now you know Thomas, when he's asking for the theology as science there, right, in the beginning of the Summa, and there's this famous quote from Augustine: "That theology is a science by which faith is engendered, right? Nourished, strengthened, and defended, and so on. " But there you see how theology is what, in a sense, subordinate to faith, right? It's there to engender faith in other people and in those who already have it to nourish it and defend it and so on against these attacks that are made upon it sometimes.

[40:12] But but it's really for the sake of faith, huh? Okay. We better stop. What? We better stop for today. Okay, okay. So we'll start there at the bottom of page 10, I guess. We'll start there at the bottom of page 10, I guess. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay.