Tuesday, September 11, 2007

Leo XIII on Rationalist Biblical Interpretation


When I was in Rome I got to spend some time at the tomb of Leo XIII, who wrote what Pius XII called, "the supreme guide in biblical studies" (Divino Afflante Spiritu, 2), Providentissimus Deus (1893). Here's a brief excerpt...
_______________________________________
Leo XIII, Providentissimus Deus, 10: But first it must be clearly understood whom we have to oppose and contend against, and what are their tactics and their arms. In earlier times the contest was chiefly with those who, relying on private judgment and repudiating the divine traditions and teaching office of the Church, held the Scriptures to be the one source of revelation and the final appeal in matters of Faith. Now, we have to meet the Rationalists, true children and inheritors of the older heretics, who, trusting in their turn to their own way of thinking, have rejected even the scraps and remnants of Christian belief which had been handed down to them. They deny that there is any such thing as revelation or inspiration, or Holy Scripture at all; they see, instead, only the forgeries and the falsehoods of men; they set down the Scripture narratives as stupid fables and lying stories: the prophecies and the oracles of God are to them either predictions made up after the event or forecasts formed by the light of nature; the miracles and the wonders of God's power are not what they are said to be, but the startling effects of natural law, or else mere tricks and myths; and the Apostolic Gospels and writings are not the work of the Apostles at all.

These detestable errors, whereby they think they destroy the truth of the divine Books, are obtruded on the world as the peremptory pronouncements of a certain newly-invented "free science;" a science, however, which is so far from final that they are perpetually modifying and supplementing it. And there are some of them who, notwithstanding their impious opinions and utterances about God, and Christ, the Gospels and the rest of Holy Scripture, would faro be considered both theologians and Christians and men of the Gospel, and who attempt to disguise by such honourable names their rashness and their pride. To them we must add not a few professors of other sciences who approve their views and give them assistance, and are urged to attack the Bible by a similar intolerance of revelation. And it is deplorable to see these attacks growing every day more numerous and more severe. It is sometimes men of learning and judgment who are assailed; but these have little difficulty in defending themselves from evil consequences. The efforts and the arts of the enemy are chiefly directed against the more ignorant masses of the people. They diffuse their deadly poison by means of books, pamphlets, and newspapers; they spread it by addresses and by conversation; they are found everywhere; and they are in possession of numerous schools, taken by violence from the Church, in which, by ridicule and scurrilous jesting, they pervert the credulous and unformed minds of the young to the contempt of Holy Scripture. Should not these things, Venerable Brethren, stir up and set on fire the heart of every Pastor, so that to this "knowledge, falsely so called,"(1 Tim 6:20) may be opposed the ancient and true science which the Church, through the Apostles, has received from Christ, and that Holy Scripture may find the champions that are needed in so momentous a battle?

3 comments:

Joe McClane said...

Hi Michael,

This is a prophetic as Humane Vitae was... you know where I run into this attitude a lot? Among Catholics... unfortunately! Too Many good Catholics have fallen victim to relativism. Just last week I had a discussion with a man from my Men’s prayer group over Divorce & Annulment. He just couldn’t understand what right the Church had to “mistreat” the divorced by not allowing remarriage. When it came down to it the discussion was really about Truth to which he replied he didn’t believe in objective moral Truth. How sad that is. I am glad to hear our Pope speaking out against this issue.

Thanks for sharing this passage.

God Bless
Joe M
The Catholic Hack!
www.catholichack.com

bill bannon said...

Michael
I doubt that Leo XIII would have liked reading "Birth of the Messiah" by Fr.Raymond Brown and its moments of rationalism like the section on how Mary never really said or originated the Magnificat (pages 346-353) and yet Paul VI and John Paul II appointed him to the Pontifical Biblical Commission. I suspect that area of Church is overwhelmed by the perplexities that Leo was trying to simplify too much and like Nineveh...that area of Church does not know "how to distinguish their right hand from their left." I like Brown at times but not at his rationalist times which were many.
And I personally think the ascendancy of his school of thought is what made John Paul too quick to edit passages out of his consciousness in a like manner resulting in his so called developments on the death penalty and on husband headship which is unmentioned in the Catechism and insisted on trenchantly in the first sentence of Casti Cannubii's section 74.

Alan Sr. said...

Great quote - but I don't believe it was really written by Leo XIII, because that would be too prophetic. Rather, it must have been written after the event and attributed to him! :)