De Moor II:25: The Perspicuity of Scripture, Part 2

[If you are being blessed by the translation work, please consider supporting the work and speeding it on its way.]

We shall now prove the Subjective Perspicuity of the Scripture against the Papists in the sense in which that was declared in the preceding §.  For Bellarmine, when he takes up this controversy against us, book III de Verbo Dei, chapters I, II, Controversiis, tome I, column 159 and following, set forth the state of the Question in a less useful manner, saying that it is asked:  Are the Sacred Scriptures of themselves altogether easy and open, or do they require interpretation?  And he maintains that this is the opinion of the Protestants, that the Scriptures are of themselves altogether easy and open, so that they do not require interpretation.

But we contend that, although Scripture treats of Matters sublime and obscure, it nevertheless treats of Matters necessary to be believed and to be done for salvation in a very Perspicuous manner, if not everywhere, at least in many places; so that even Laymen, with the Illumination of the Holy Spirit mediating, are able to read it with profit and to understand it savingly:  but that, because of the blindness of men and the gravity of the matters related in the Scriptures, and also the difficulty of the manner of delivery in many places, the Interpretation of Scripture is practically established, so that what things are clear might be understood more perfectly, and what things are obscure might be understood to some extent, which interpretation, nevertheless, is to be sought again from the Scripture itself, according to 2 Peter 1:20.

We prove this opinion:

1.  From most obvious testimonies, in which the Scripture itself affirms its own Perspicuity.  Now, what the Scripture testifies concerning itself is true, because it is the testimony of God Himself speaking in the Scripture.  But Scripture testifies that it is Perspicuous:

              α.  In the Old Testament, Deuteronomy 30:11-14.  And indeed, what word was not before Israel as marvelous and hidden, in such a way that it was permitted only to marvel at it, but not to comprehend it, and what was not far off, but very near, to do it; this word is to be called Perspicuous:  which is established both immediately and naturally from the very words, and from the scope of Moses, who by this his word wants to withdraw from the Israelites all pretext for Ignorance of the divine Word, after the revelation of the covenant Law given to the Israelites through his own ministry; above other peoples left in their natural ignorance.  But without Perspicuity sufficient for a saving understanding, that Word, considering the sound only and not the sense, had been so little advantageous to have that the pretext of ignorance had not at all been removed.

Neither is it to be Excepted with Bellarmine, book III de Verbo Dei, chapter II, Controversiis, tome I, column 164, that, a.  Moses speaks concerning the ease of fulfilling the Law; since he is removing the pretext, not for Impotence, but for Ignorance; the ease of fulfilling the Law, to be understood only in a sound sense, supposes the ease of understanding its commandments, which is primarily treated here, and without which commandments are not able to be fulfilled.

They Except that, b.  the understanding of the Scriptures is not treated, but only of the precepts of the Decalogue and the like, which are natural, and had been perspicuously declared to the Hebrews by Moses.

Responses:  1.  There is no restriction here to the moral or natural Law, which was not hidden or far from the Gentiles either; but Moses speaks of the entire Covenant Precept in the written book of the Law, under which Evangelical promises are also comprehended.  2.  Even if from this passage the Perspicuity of the Law alone, as the rule of things to be done, was established, from other passages a similar Perspicuity of the Gospel is no less validly proven.

              β.  For the Scripture testifies no less in the New Testament that it is Perspicuous, and indeed in relation to the Gospel, 2 Corinthians 4:2-4, in which the Gospel and its truth are said φανεροῦν, to manifest, themselves to every conscience of men, and to be hidden only from ἀπολλυμένοις, those that are perishing, through the intervening blindness of the god of this age.  So, unless impediments intervene on the part of men, the Gospel is φανερὸν/manifest, ἀποκαλυμμένον/open, and Perspicuous, no less than the Mosaic Word is declared to be, Deuteronomy 30.

Again, it is not to be Excepted with Bellarmine, book III de Verbo Dei, chapter II, Controversiis, tome I, column 166, that this is a discussion, not of the understanding of the Scriptures, but of knowledge and faith upon Christ, which the Apostles were preaching.  For it is treated directly of the Gospel and its preaching, from which knowledge and faith upon Christ are drawn, unto which the Perspicuity of the Gospel contributes much.

2.  We appeal to the Similitudes of Light and Lamp, under which the Scripture comes with simplicity; with a reason added from the instruction and illumination of the simple themselves, which supposes an innate light.  And so what Scripture is formally and at the same time effectively, shining and bright, that is Perspicuous.  But such is the Sacred Scripture.  Therefore.  The Proving of the Minor is easy:  the Scripture is formally shining, for it is a Light, Lamp, Psalm 119:105; Proverbs 6:23; no less effectively, because it illuminates the eyes and gives wisdom to those that are simple, Psalm 19:7, 8; 119:130:  it is a Lamp shining in a dark place, 2 Peter 1:19, on which passage see Commentarium meum.

Bellarmine takes exception, book III de Verbo Dei, chapter II, Controversiis, tome I, column 165, that, a. in these passages sought out of Psalm 19; 119, and Proverbs 6, the entirety of Scripture is not treated, but only the dominical precepts.  b.  Or all Scriptures are indeed treated, but the Scriptures are said to be shining, indeed, a light and lamp, both here and in 2 Peter 1, not because they are easily understood, but because, when they are understood, they illuminate the mind.

Responses:  a.  Under the name of Law and Precept in the passages cited, as in a great many places, the entire Word of God without restriction is indicated, which the effects of conversion, rejoicing, etc., sufficiently indicate.  b.  Nothing is more silly than the other Exception:  for it is the same as if I should say that the Scripture does not illuminate unless it illuminates; for whereby it is understood, by the very same it illuminates.  But Scripture, as a light truly illuminating, shines by its own light, casts itself upon the eyes, and makes it so that we might see and understand; compare Psalm 119:98, 104, 130.

3.  Many Reasons for the Perspicuity of Scripture are added, α.  from the efficient cause or the Divine Author, the Father of Lights,[1] wisest and highest, who is indeed able and willing to speak clearly; neither is this able to be said, that He is not able or not willing, without injury to His wisdom and goodness.  β.  From the matter, or the sufficiently perspicuous summary of both parts, the Law and the Gospel, John 3:16; Matthew 22:37-39; and elsewhere.  But what is perspicuous in the doctrine of the Law and Gospel, that is perspicuous in necessary dogmas.  But....   Therefore.  But we maintain no more than this.  γ.  From the goal of omnimodal instruction and Canonical use, Romans 15:4; 2 Timothy 3:15-17; but that goal is not able to be obtained without sufficient Perspicuity.  δ.  From the persons for whom the Scripture was designed, all Christians, even the immature, Psalm 19:7; 119:130; 2 Timothy 3:15; 1 Peter 2:2, etc.; Habakkuk 2:2,כְּת֣וֹב חָז֔וֹן וּבָאֵ֖ר עַל־הַלֻּח֑וֹת לְמַ֥עַן יָר֖וּץ ק֥וֹרֵא בֽוֹ׃ , write the vision, and make it plain upon tables, that he may run that readeth it, upon which passage see the Commentarium of our AUTHOR.

This Perspicuity of Sacred Scripture was already of old asserted by the Fathers; see LEYDEKKER’S Veritatem Euangelicam triumphantem, tome I, book I, chapter XII, § 4, pages 139, 140.

[1] James 1:17.