Bellarmine · De Controversiis · On the Word of God · Book III: On the Interpretation of Scripture
Chapter 9: The same proved from reason
Our translation, from the Latin of the Opera Omnia (Paris: Vivès, 1870–74), vol. I, De Verbo Dei, Book III: On the Interpretation of Scripture. The Latin source text is public domain; this English rendering is released with the site. Scripture quotations follow Bellarmine's Vulgate citations, rendered in Douay-Rheims wording where he quotes exactly. Click “Show the Latin” for the original (raw OCR of the scan; scanning errors remain — the scan itself is the authority).
It is proved lastly by reason. God was not ignorant that many difficulties concerning Faith would arise in the Church; he ought therefore to have provided the Church with some judge. But that judge cannot be the Scripture, nor a private revealing spirit, nor a secular Prince; therefore it is an Ecclesiastical Prince, either alone, or at least with the counsel and consent of his fellow-Bishops. For nothing else is imagined, nor can be imagined, to which this judgment could seem to pertain. And first, that the Scripture is not the judge is plain, because it admits various senses, and cannot itself say which is the true one. Besides, in every well-instituted and ordered commonwealth, the law and the judge are distinct things. For the law teaches what is to be done, and the judge interprets the law and directs men according to it. Finally, the question is of the interpretation of Scripture; but Scripture cannot interpret itself.
But, they say, from the comparison of various places the true sense can easily be drawn out by anyone skilled in the tongues. But what if there are many skilled in the tongues, and they compare the same places among themselves, and yet still cannot agree — who then shall be judge? Certainly many of the Lutherans, and likewise many of the Zwinglians, were skilled in the tongues, and compared the Scriptures among themselves with great labor, and yet in the explanation of that sentence, This is my body, they could never agree. But the Zwinglians, a Lutheran will say, are blinded, and therefore it is no wonder if they understand not the most clear words of the Lord. But what if the Zwinglian say the Lutherans are blinded — who shall be judge?
And that the Spirit revealing to each private man cannot be judge is easily demonstrated. Since that Spirit which is in thee is by me neither seen nor heard; but a judge ought to be seen and heard by both litigating parties; for such are those who contend, namely bodily men — for if we were spirits, perhaps the judgment of a spirit would suffice. Besides, in a temporal commonwealth all men have the true natural light by which the law was made, and which suffices to expound it, and yet the interpretation of the law is never permitted to the private judgment of each one; and if it were permitted, the commonwealth could not long endure. How much less, then, is the interpretation of Scripture to be permitted to the judgment of each one, since not all have that true supernatural light by which the Scripture was made, and which is necessary to understand it rightly?
Besides, a judge ought to have coactive authority, otherwise his judgment would profit nothing; but private men have no such authority. Likewise very many are so rude and unskilled that they themselves confess that they can in no way judge of the questions of Faith; and yet even they can be saved; it is not therefore necessary that all judge.
Finally, if that private revealing spirit were the judge, the way to the conversion of heretics would be barred, and no controversies could ever be terminated. For there is no one of the heretics who does not boast of the spirit, and who does not prefer his own spirit to the spirits of others; and just as, 2 Paralipomenon 18, when Micheas the Prophet of the Lord said that he spoke in the name of the Lord, but that the false prophets were driven by the spirit of lying, Sedecias the false prophet answered him: Which way went the Spirit of the Lord from me, to speak to thee? So if a Catholic should say, The Spirit so reveals to me, the heretic would answer: And by which way? etc.
And that the secular Prince is not the judge is proved. For nothing can go beyond the power received from its causes; but the causes of secular sovereignty are human and natural; for the efficient cause is the choice of the people, the end is the peace and temporal tranquillity of the commonwealth; therefore the Prince as such has no power or authority but human, such as the people could give, and such as is required for preserving temporal peace. A sign of which is that even without the Church there are true Kings and temporal Princes, and without them there can be a true Church, as in the Roman world in the first three hundred years.
Nor does it stand in the way that Romans 13 it is said: There is no power but from God; and he that resisteth the power resisteth the ordinance of God. For the Apostle does not mean to say that the royal power is immediately from God, but mediately, because God placed that natural instinct in men, that they should create for themselves a King; just as human laws too can be said to be from God, because they are made by the natural light which God impressed on the human mind in creation. But the Ecclesiastical sovereignty has divine and supernatural causes; for the efficient cause is immediately God, since the Pontiff has his authority not from the Church, but from Christ, who said to him, Feed my sheep, John last chapter, and, To thee will I give the keys of the kingdom of heaven, etc., Matthew 16; and the end is eternal beatitude.
Wherefore outside the Church there is found no true Pontiff, nor true Priests, nor without these can there be a Church. And hence Nazianzen in his oration to the citizens struck with fear, Chrysostom in homily 4 on the words of Isaiah, and Ambrose in the book On the dignity of the priesthood chapter 2 say that a Bishop is as much greater than a King as spirit excels flesh, heaven earth, gold lead. And therefore also the pontificate and the priesthood pertain of themselves to the Church; but temporal sovereignty by accident. Therefore, since to define matters of Faith and to interpret the divine Scriptures is a spiritual Ecclesiastical act, certainly it pertains not to the temporal Prince, but to the spiritual and Ecclesiastical one.
Show the Latin (Vives edition, OCR)
CAPUT IX. Idem probatur ex ratione. Probatur ultimo ratione. Non ignorabat Deus, multas in Ecclesia exorituras difficul¬ tates circa Fidem; debuit igitur judicem aliquem Ecclesiae providere : at iste judex non potest esse Scriptura, neque spiritus re¬ velans privatus, neque Princeps saecularis ; igitur Princeps Ecclesiasticus, vel solus, vel certe cum consilio et consensu Coepiscopo- rum : nec enim fingitur, neque potest fingi aliquid aliud, ad quod hoc judicium perti¬ nere posse videatur. Ac primum, non esse judicem Scripturam, planum est, quia va¬ rios sensus recipit, nec potest ipsa dicere, quis sit verus. Praeterea in omni Republica bene instituta et ordinata, lex et judex dis¬ tinctae res sunt. Lex enim docet, quid agen¬ dum, et judex legem interpretatur, et se¬ cundum eam homines dirigit. Denique de Scripturae interpretatione quaestio est : non autem se ipsa interpretari potest. At, inquiunt, ex collatione variorum loco¬ rum facile potest a quovis linguarum perito erui verus sensus. Sed quid, si multi sint linguarum periti, et eadem loca inter se conferant, et tamen adhuc convenire non possint : quis tum erit judex? certe multi Lutheranorum, multi item Zwinglianorum linguarum periti fuerunt, et Scripturas inter se magno labore contulerunt, et tamen in explicatione illius sententiae : Hoc est Corpus meum , convenire nunquam potuerunt. At Zwingliani, dicet Lutheranus, excaecati sunt, proinde nihil mirum, si clarissima Domini verba non intelligant. Sed quid, si Zwinglia- nus Lutheranos excaecatos dicat, quis erit judex? Quod autem Spiritus revelans unicuique privato homini judex esse non possit, facile demonstratur. Siquidem ille, qui est in te, a me neque videtur, neque auditur : judex debet videri et audiri ab utraque parte liti¬ gante ; nam tales sunt qui contendunt, ni¬ mirum homines corporales, si enim spiritus essemus, forte sufficeret judicium spiritus. Praeterea in Republica temporali omnes ho¬ mines habent verum lumen naturale, quo lex condita est, et quod sufficit ad eam ex¬ ponendam, et tamen nunquam permittitur legis interpretatio privato judicio unius¬ cujusque : et- si permitteretur, diu Respu¬ blica durare non posset; quanto ergo minus permittenda est Scripturae interpretatio ju¬ dicio uniuscujusque, cum non habeant om¬ nes verum illud supernaturale lumen, quo Scriptura condita est, et quod est necessa¬ rium ad eam recte intelligendam. Praeterea, judex debet habere auctorita¬ tem coactivam, alioqui nihil prodesset ejus judicium : at privati homines nullam habent talem auctoritatem. Item plurimi sunt adeo rudes et imperiti, ut ipsimet fateantur, sc nullo modo posse judicare de quaestionibus Fidei, et tamen etiam illi salvari possunt ; non est igitur necesse, ut omnes judicent. Denique, si spiritus iste revelans privatus esset judex, praecluderetur via conversioni haereticorum, nec ullae controversiae unquam terminari possent. Nam nemo est haeretico¬ rum, qui spiritum non jactet, et qui spiritum suum non praeponat spiritibus aliorum, et sicut II Paral. XVIII cum diceret Michaeas Propheta Domini se loqui in nomine Domini, Pseudoprophetas autem agitari spiritu men¬ dacii; respondit ei Sedecias Pseudopro¬ pheta : Per quam viam pertransivit Spiritus Domini a me , ut loqueretur tibi (I)? Ita si Ca¬ tholicus diceret : Spiritus ita mihi revelat, responderet haereticus; et per quam viam? etc. Quod autem non sit Princeps saecularis ju¬ dex, probatur. Nam nihil potest ultra virtu¬ tem a causis suis acceptam : causae autem principatus saecularis humanae et naturales sunt ; nam efficiens est electio populi, finis est pax, et tranquillitas temporalis Reipubli- cae; igitur non habet virtutem, neque aucto¬ ritatem Princeps ut talis, nisi humanam, qualem populus dare potuit, et qualis requi¬ ritur ad conservandam temporalem pacem. Cujus signum est, quod etiam sine Ecclesia sunt veri Reges, et Principes temporales; et sine illis esse potest vera Ecclesia, ut in orbe Romano primis trecentis annis. Neque obstat, quod Rom. XIII dicitur : Non est potestas nisi a Deo. et qui potestati re- (1) II. Paralip. XVIII. 23. 188 LIBER III. sistit, Dei ordinationi resistit (1). Nam non vult Apostolus dicere, regiam potestatem esse immediate a Deo, sed mediate, quia Deus instinctum illum naturalem posuit in hominibus, ut crearent sibi Regem : sicut etiam leges humanae dici possunt a Deo, quia fiunt lumine naturali, quod Deus in mente humana in creatione impressit. At principa¬ tus Ecclesiasticus causas habet divinas et supernaturales : nam efficiens immediate est Deus, neque enim Pontifex ah Ecclesia auc7 toritatem habet, sed a Christo, qui dixit ei : Pasce oves meas , Jo. ult. Et : Tibi dabo claves regni coelorum etc. Matth. XYI(2). Finis autem est aeterna beatitudo. Quocirca extra Ecclesiam non invenitur verus Pontifex, nec veri Sacerdotes, nec sine his esse potest Ecclesia. Et hincNazianzenus in oratione ad cives timore perculsos ; Ghry- sostomus in hom. 4. in verba Isaise, et Am- bros. lib. de dignit. sacerdot. c. 2. dicunt, Episcopum tanto esse majorem Rege, quanto spiritus carni, coelum terne, aurum plumbo praestat. Et propterea etiam pontificatus, et sacerdotium per se ad Ecclesiam pertinent : principatus autem temporalis per accidens. Igitur cum res Fidei definire, et Scripturas divinas interpretari sit actus spiritualis Ec¬ clesiasticus, certe non ad Principem tempo¬ ralem, sed ad spiritualem et Ecclesiasticum * pertinet.