A Musing on Historical-Criticism of the Bible

Leave a reply

One of the great problems with the historical-critical method when it comes to the Bible, is that it denies supernatural reality and revelation de facto. It messes up the whole history of Israel in the Old Testament because it begins from a vantage point which denies the possibility of divine revelation, so it seeks alternative explanations as to the origin of Israel’s religion. Rather than Hebrew religion being a divine gift to Abraham and Moses and their followers, historical-criticism reduces it to a slowly evolving and developing religion that began as a mixture of various beliefs and practices adopted from other nations and cultures. Why? Because historical-criticism cannot believe in revealed religion. It is not within its purview.

That is exactly where the historical-critical method loses its explanatory power. The fact is that Israel’s religion was revealed by God. It did not evolve out of Canaanite religious practices or beliefs of random Ancient Near Eastern peoples. God actually revealed himself to his people and gave them a way to seek him. Since the historical-critical method cannot admit this, being beyond the bounds of secular science, it fails to explain the importance of the Bible. It is brilliant at dissecting the parts and pieces of the Bible–explaining words and archeology and geography. But it cannot tell you why to read the Bible, how it will change your life or why the Bible makes a difference in the real world.

But the Bible will change your life, not because it is an interesting ancient book, but because it is the word of God to man. It is God’s instructions to you about life, death and meaning. Pick it up and read it, not for a perusal of Ancient Near Eastern religious practices, but for spiritual life from the God who loves you.

The Early Responsa of the Pontifical Biblical Commission

5 Replies

I have recently become very interested in a twisted problem that has polarized debate among Catholic exegetes for the past 100 years. It is the question of the authority or non-authority of the early responsa of the Pontifical Biblical Commission.

The PBC was established by Pope Leo XIII in the document Vigilantiae studiique to undertake “the challenge of explaining and safeguarding” the Scriptures (sec. 3). It was made an official arm of the Magisterium with this statement, “Its work will have the happy result of providing the Apostolic See with the opportunity to declare what ought to be inviolably maintained by Catholics, what ought to be reserved for further research, and what ought to be left for the judgment of each individual.” (sec. 9)

Later, when the PBC’s authority was questioned, Pius X gave a formal pronouncement saying that “Wherefore we find it necessary to declare and to expressly prescribe, and by this our act we do declare and decree that all are bound in conscience to submit to the decisions of the Biblical Commission relating to doctrine, which have been given in the past and which shall be given in the future, in the same way as to the decrees of the Roman congregations approved by the Pontiff; nor can all those escape the note of disobedience or temerity, and consequently of grave sin, who in speech or writing contradict such decisions, and this besides the scandal they give and the other reasons for which they may be responsible before God for other temerities and errors which generally go with such contradictions.”(Praestantia Sacrae Scripturae 18 November 1907 text here)

The PBC convened and proceeded to answer specific questions addressed to it. Some of the answers it gave directly contradicted the “scholarly consensus” of its day and ours. Here is a simplified summary of their decisions:
13 February 1905 – Implied quotations of non-scriptural sources in Scripture have the same authority unless the sacred writer does not approve them or make them his own.
23 June 1905 – The Biblical narrative is historically accurate.
27 June 1906 – Moses is the author of the Pentateuch.
29 May 1907 – The Apostle John wrote the Gospel of John.
30 June 1909 – First three chapters of Genesis are historical, not mythical narratives.
1 May 1910 – The authorship of the Psalms
19 June 1911 – Matthew’s Gospel came first and was written in Aramaic.
26 June 1912 – The authorship of Mark and Luke
26 June 1912 – The Two-Source Hypothesis is wrong
12 June 1913 – Luke wrote Acts
12 June 1913 – Paul wrote 1 Tim, 2 Tim and Titus
24 June 1914 – The book of Hebrews
18 June 1918 – The Second Coming
17 November 1921 – Textual variants not in the Clementine edition of the Vulgate are acceptable for publication.
1 July 1933 – Ps. 15 and Matt. 16:26
(Full text of the PBC decisions here.)

After the publication of the Encyclical of Pope Pius XII, Divino afflante Spiritu, the curia set out to publish the Enchiridion Biblicum, which was a 1954 handbook of official Church statements on the Bible. But at the time of its publication Catholic scholars were feeling constrained by the PBC’s early 20th century pronouncements. Two members of the PBC, the secretary Athanasius Miller, OSB and subsecretary Arduin Kleinhans, OFM published nearly identical articles in two different journals clarifying that the PBC’s statements were not binding on Catholic exegetes. Miller’s article was published in German and Kleinhans’ was in Latin. The citations for the articles are below. (I got much of this info from Bechard, Dean P. The Scripture Documents: An Anthology of Official Catholic Teachings. Collegeville, MN: Litugical Press, 2002, pp.318-329.) The clarification article was also published in the American journal, Catholic Biblical Quarterly.

So the question is whether the semi-official clarification published in these journals truly repealed the statement of Pius X on Nov 18, 1907 which made the PBC decisions binding. Unfortunately this question has not been completely resolved. Catholic Bible scholars, effectively, do their work as if the responsa of the PBC are not longer binding on the faithful. But as is pointed out by Sean Kopcynski, the responsa have never been officially repealed or eliminated by an official statement or clarification. In the meantime, the PBC has lost its status as an official organ of the Magisterium and is now merely a consulting body (See Paul VI, Sedula cura, 27 June 1971).

Interestingly, the reality of the present-day irrelevance of the responsa is confirmed by some very important figures including Cardinal Ratzinger–now Pope Benedict XVI. Quoted Bechard’s book (p.328, footnote 38), Ratzinger regards some warnings of the Magisterium as statements which “their core remains valid, but the individual details influenced by the circumstances at the time may need further rectification” including “the statements of the Popes during the last century on religious freedom as well as the decisions of the Biblical Commission of that time.” Ratzinger made these comments in L’Osservatore Romano 2 July 1990. Update 3/27/08: I got the text of Ratzinger’s comments from L’Osservatore Romano 2 July 1990, p.5. Here’s a fuller quotation from his explanation on The Ecclesial Vocation of the Theologian, “The text also offers different forms of binding which arise from different levels of magisterial teaching. It states–perhaps for the first time with such clarity–that there are magisterial decisions that cannot be intended to be (corrected 10/24/17 Thanks to reader Johannes!) the last word on the matter as such, but are a substantial anchorage in the problem and are first and foremost an expression of pastoral prudence, a sort of provisional disposition. Their core remains valid, but the individual details influenced by the circumstances at the time may need further rectification. In this regard one can refer to the statements of the Popes during the last century on religious freedom as well as the anti-modernistic decisions at the beginning of this century, especially the decisions of the Biblical Commission of that time. As a warning cry against hasty and superficial adaptations they remain fully justified; a person of the stature of Johann Baptist Metz has said, for example, that the antimodernist decisions of the Church rendered a great service in keeping her from sinking into the liberal-bourgeois world. But the details of the determinations of their contents were later superceded once they had carried out their pastoral duty at a particular moment.”

There is at least one Catholic biblical scholar who did not accept the majority view about the clarification. That was J.E. Steinmueller in The Sword of the Spirit (Waco, TX: Stella Maris, 1977). Update 3/24/08: Here’s a quote from Steinmueller f
rom 1941 showing his position before the semi-official clarification, “On October 30, 1902, Pope Leo XIII instituted the Pontifical Biblical Commission to promote and direct biblical studies, and on November 18, 1907, Pope Pius X in his Motu Proprio determined the authority of its decisions. From these it follows: (1) that the Decrees are neither infallible nor irreformable; (2) that they are of the same authority as the other Sacred Congregations; (3) that external as well as internal consent is required; (4) that this assent need not be absolute and irreformable; (5) that the formal object of these Decrees is either security or non-security of any doctrine.” (Steinmueller, J.E., A Companion to Scripture Studies [New York: Joseph F. Wagner, 1941] p. 245) There is a lot of technical language in Steinmueller’s summary, but I think it’s clear enough. (end update) Update 4/14/08: I finally got my hands on Steinmueller’s comments about the semi-official clarification of 1955. I quote two sentences and their footnote in full from his book Sword of the Spirit, p.7. First the sentences, “The Church has made no definite and dogmatic pronouncements as the the authorship of any book of the Bible. The decrees of the first Biblical Commission, however, should be regarded as directive norms, and it would be temerarious to disregard them, even though research may be carried further.” Now the footnote:

“I was consultor of the first Pontifical Biblical Commission from 1947 (after the publication of Divino afflante Spiritu) to 1971; and I never heard any intimation that any decrees of the Commission were ever revoked. At most they were clarified (cf. Letter to Cardinal Suhard of Paris, 1948). Recently some Catholic scholars have asserted that the decrees were implicitly revoked by Divino afflante Spiritu (1943) and that this is confirmed by two articles written in 1955 by A. Miller and A. Kleinhans, who seem to restrict the scope of the decrees to matters of faith and morals (cf. Jerome Biblical Commentary, Vol. II, p. 629). The articles referred to were unauthorized and were condemned by the voting Cardinal members of the Commission. A. Miller and A. Kleinhans were to be brought before the Holy Office because of the articles, but were saved from this ordeal through the personal intervention of Cardinal Tisserant before the Holy Father. It was my friend, Father Miller, O.S.B., who told me the whole story before his return to Germany.
“Decisions of this Pontifical Biblical Commission were sent to the Holy Father, who ratified them or sent them back for further consideration. The official decisions were published only at his command.
“This first Pontifical Biblical Commission as an independent commission came to an end by the apostolic letter issued ‘Motu Proprio’ by Pope Paul VI, June 27, 1971. As a new body the Biblical Commission was to be a dependent subcommission under the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith presided over by its Cardinal Prefect. Its members are appointed by the Supreme Pontiff, on the proposal of the Cardinal president after consultation with the episcopal conferences.”

Phew! Ok, so that was a really long quote, but I think it’s good to get this stuff out there. The only question I still have about Steinmueller’s story is who “Father Miller, OSB” actually is. I suppose it could be the same as Athanasius Miller, OSB but I’m not sure. I also wonder if Miller, Kleinhans or even Tisserant have published memoirs or recollections about this event. It would be very interesting to find more in writing about this. It is also fascinating that Steinmueller recounts the cardinals on the PBC voting to condemn the articles which were ostensibly semi-official PBC documents. True, Steinmueller does not actually say the articles were condemned by a vote, but that they were “condemned by the voting cardinal members of the commission.” This whole story keeps getting more convoluted! (end update)

So it seems to me that while the issue has never been officially resolved, the reponsa have been effectively sidelined as no longer binding. It seems unfortunate to me that the situation has never been officially clarified and Pius X’s warnings of grave sin on the part of those who disagree with the PBC’s statements is still out there. But I suppose that the issue may be resolved at some point, but maybe not.

Resources:
Text of Pontifical Biblical Commission Responsa from Catholic Apologetics International (unofficial translation)
Leo XIII. Vigilantiae studiique. 30 October 1902.
Pius X. Lamentabili Sane. 3 July 1907.
Pius X. Pascendi dominici gregis. 8 September 1907.
Pius X. Praestantia Sacrae Scripturae. 18 November 1907.
Pius XII. Divino afflante Spiritu. 30 September 1943.
Paul VI, Sedula cura, 27 June 1971.

Bechard, Dean P. The Scripture Documents. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 2002.
Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. The Ecclesial Vocation of the Theologian. 24 May 1990.
Kleinhans, Arduin. “De nova Enchiridii Biblici editione.” Antonianem 30 (1955): 63-65.
Kopczynski, Sean. “Rediscovering the Decrees of the Pontifical Biblical Commission.” Living Tradition 94(2001).
Miller, Athanasius. “Das neue biblische Handbuch.” Benediktinische Monatschrift 31 (1955): 49-50.
Miller, Athanasius. Catholic Biblical Quarterly 18 (1956): 24-25.
Pontifical Biblical Commission Documents List from Vatican site.
Ratzinger, Joseph Cardinal. “Relationship Between Magisterium and Exegetes.” An address to the PBC. 10 May 2003.
Steinmueller, J.E. The Sword of the Spirit. Waco, TX: Stella Maris, 1977.

My Inspirations #2: St. Thomas Aquinas

Leave a reply

Life: 1225-1274
Profession: Friar, Theologian, Philosopher

St. Thomas was prolific to say the least. His most important work is the very famous Summa Theologica which attempts to sum up all of Christian theology concisely. I mean, it’s only five thick volumes. That’s not too bad, right?

The reason I enjoy Thomas is that he is a very systematic and honest thinker. He makes no bones about impressing people. He simply writes and argues through every bit of truth. He forces himself to honestly answer the toughest challenges to his own arguments. I wouldn’t say that most of his work is terribly enjoyable to read, but it certainly is profound. He goes over all sorts of questions and topics, but he approaches everything from within his whole system of thought. He doesn’t leave anything hanging.

I have read a decent amount of Thomas, but no one can read enough and few, if any, have ever read everything. His theology has become the gold standard of Catholic theology for the ages. While there are parts of his system that many contemporary thinkers have taken issue with, Pope Leo XIII encouraged Catholics to look to Thomas’ philosophy and theology in Aeterni Patris (1879).

There are some fun stories about Thomas Aquinas. I will relate a couple to you.

1.) One time a brother friar of his came into the place where Thomas was praying and found him levitating and looking intently at a crucifix. The corpus on the cross came to life and asked Thomas if there was anything he wanted in all the world in return for his theological work. And the saint replied simply, “Just more of you.” (I have not source-checked this story. So if anyone has any sources for it, please comment below.)

2.) It is said that St. Thomas was so fat that a half-circle had to be cut out of the table where he normally ate. (Also, not checked)

3.) Thomas was of a noble family and his family members were none too happy when he announced he wanted to be a Dominican friar, so they locked him in a tower and sent in a prostitute to steal away his purity. (This is the stuff of legend.) Supposedly, Thomas chased her out of his room with a hot poker from the fireplace and was later lowered from the tower in a basket.

A few little factoids about St. Thomas: He studied in Sicily where he met people from across the Mediterranean, including Muslims. He was good friends with St. Bonaventure and received his doctorate at the same ceremony as Bonaventure. He died in transit to the Fifth Lateran Council in 1274–the same year Bonaventure died. He was tall and large and quiet so he got the nickname “Dumb Ox.” He taught at the University of Paris. He wrote the “Panis Angelicus,” sung as a sequence for the feast of Corpus Christi.

——
Books about St. Thomas Aquinas that I have read:
St. Thomas Aquinas: The Dumb Ox by G.K. Chesterton
-This book is a short introduction to Thomas’ life and thought. I found it fun to get into the spirit of his thought, but it does not give a lot of the biographical details you expect from a biography. It’s not really a biography, but a portrait. I also find Chesterton’s prose to be rather laborious sometimes.

Knowing the Love of Christ by Matthew Levering and Michael Dauphinais.
-This short book is a helpful introduction to the Summa Theologica. It presents Thomas’ thought as a unity and tries to outline the content to orient the new reader before he dives in and gets lost in the labyrinth of the Summa.
——-
Websites about St. Thomas Aquinas:
The Wikipedia Article
A Bibliography of Aquinas’ works in English
Complete Works of St. Thomas Aquinas in Latin
Works by Aquinas on CCEL

Updated! 12-3-2007
Aquinas Bible Commentaries
Texts by and about Aquinas at archive.org
——-

Many books have been written about his thought–too many. In fact there are whole schools of thought and journals just about “Thomistic” thought. So be careful. Don’t get lost in the shuffle. Thomas is good to read, but you have to take it slow and use easy introductory material to prevent you from getting lost!

My Inspirations #1: Mortimer Adler

1 Reply

You may have wondered about the portraits in my sidebar of various individuals. I labeled this group of people “My Inspirations,” not because no one else has inspired me, but because these individuals have touched my heart in a certain way that is unique and life-changing. In an important sense, I want my life to be like their lives. Obviously, I don’t want to relive Mother Teresa’s life or reproduce the works of C.S. Lewis, but I do want to live in the same spirit of love that animated Mother Teresa and I want to be able to write with the simple profundity of C.S. Lewis.

So I’m going to write a series of profiles of each of these persons and explain their influence on my life. I also will strive to provide a bibliography of their published works and significant links to where you can find out more about them. I will not attempt to provide full biographies, just some vital statistics that will introduce you to some people who have inspired me. Maybe they’ll inspire you too.

We begin with Mortimer Adler, not because he is the most important on the list but because his name comes first in the alphabet.

Mortimer Adler
Life: 1902-2001
Profession: Writer and professor

Mortimer Adler’s most significant intellectual contribution was his creation of the Great Books program at the University of Chicago. He also edited the “Great Books” series published by Encyclopedia Britannica, which you may have spied on your grandparents’ bookshelf.

His greatest influence on my life was a little book called How To Read a Book. This handy little book has helped me make the immense amount of time I spend reading more fruitful and productive. Frankly it’s the best book about reading a book. I highly recommend it if you get a chance to pick it up. He presents a method for systematically reading a book and he even tells you how to mark a book’s margins. At the back of How To Read a Book he includes a very good list of most of the best books ever written–really good reading material if you need something to perk up your mind.

Adler had struggled with theological and philosophical ideas his whole life, yet he had remained a self-professed pagan. But in 1984 God touched his life and Adler became a Christian, an Episcopalian to be exact. Amazingly, this was not enough. Just two years before his death, Adler converted to Catholicism. He had been going to a Catholic church with his wife and finally decided to be received into the Church himself. (Weirdly enough, his funeral was held at an Episcopalian church. I’m not really sure why. If I can figure it out, I’ll update this post. There’s also conflicting information as to whether he became Catholic in 1999 or 2000.)

I think I have a special affinity for Adler, Lewis and Muggerridge because they all struggled intellectually with the ideas of faith and Christianity before they actually converted. There’s an intellectual honesty about these men which inspires me and encourages me as I think about and struggle with the ideas of faith and philosophy.

Links about Mortimer Adler:
–The Wikipedia Article
–A brief biography by Margaret Farrand
–A stub article from Christianity Today
–The Radical Academy: Bio, Bibliography, Adler Anecdotes
–Outline of Adler’s Life
–A comprehensive bibliography

A Select Bibliography of Mortimer Adler(from Wikipedia)
* Dialectic (1927)
* The Nature of Judicial Proof: An Inquiry into the Logical, Legal, and Empirical Aspects of the Law of Evidence (1931, with Jerome Michael)
* Diagrammatics (1932, with Maude Phelps Hutchins)
* Crime, Law and Social Science (1933, with Jerome Michael)
* Art and Prudence: A Study in Practical Philosophy (1937)
* What Man Has Made of Man: A Study of the Consequences of Platonism and Positivism in Psychology (1937)
* The Philosophy and Science of Man: A Collection of Texts as a Foundation for Ethics and Politics (1940)
* How to Read a Book: The Art of Getting a Liberal Education (1940), 1966 edition subtitled A Guide to Reading the Great Books, 1972 revised edition with Charles Van Doren, The Classic Guide to Intelligent Reading: ISBN 0-671-21209-5
* A Dialectic of Morals: Towards the Foundations of Political Philosophy (1941)
* How to Think About War and Peace (1944)
* The Revolution in Education (1944, with Milton Mayer)
* The Capitalist Manifesto (1958, with Louis O. Kelso) ISBN 0-8371-8210-7
* The Idea of Freedom: A Dialectical Examination of the Conceptions of Freedom (1958)
* The New Capitalists: A Proposal to Free Economic Growth from the Slavery of Savings (1961, with Louis O. Kelso)
* The Idea of Freedom: A Dialectical Examination of the Controversies about Freedom (1961)
* Great Ideas from the Great Books (1961)
* The Conditions of Philosophy: Its Checkered Past, Its Present Disorder, and Its Future Promise (1965)
* The Difference of Man and the Difference It Makes (1967)
* The Time of Our Lives: The Ethics of Common Sense (1970)
* The Common Sense of Politics (1971)
* The American Testament (1975, with William Gorman)
* Some Questions About Language: A Theory of Human Discourse and Its Objects (1976)
* Philosopher at Large: An Intellectual Autobiography (1977)
* Reforming Education: The Schooling of a People and Their Education Beyond Schooling (1977, edited by Geraldine Van Doren)
* Aristotle for Everybody: Difficult Thought Made Easy (1978) ISBN 0-684-83823-0
* How to Think About God: A Guide for the 20th-Century Pagan (1980) ISBN 0-02-016022-4
* Six Great Ideas: Truth-Goodness-Beauty-Liberty-Equality-Justice (1981) ISBN 0-02-072020-3
* The Angels and Us (1982)
* The Paideia Proposal: An Educational Manifesto (1982)
* How to Speak / How to Listen (1983) ISBN 0-02-500570-7
* Paideia Problems and Possibilities: A Consideration of Questions Raised by The Paideia Proposal (1983)
* A Vision of the Future: Twelve Ideas for a Better Life and a Better Society (1984) ISBN 0-02-500280-5
* The Paideia Program: An Educational Syllabus (1984, with Members of the Paideia Group)
* Ten Philosophical Mistakes (1985) ISBN 0-02-500330-5
* A Guidebook to Learning: For a Lifelong Pursuit of Wisdom (1986)
* We Hold These Truths: Understanding the Ideas and Ideals of the Constitution (1987)
* Reforming Education: The Opening of the American Mind (1988, edited by Geraldine Van Doren)
* Intellect: Mind Over Matter (1990)
* Truth in Religion: The Plurality of Religions and the Unity of Truth (1990) ISBN 0-02-064140-0
* Haves Without Have-Nots: Essays for the 21st Century on Democracy and Socialism (1991) ISB
N 0-02-500561-8
* Desires, Right & Wrong: The Ethics of Enough (1991)
* A Second Look in the Rearview Mirror: Further Autobiographical Reflections of a Philosopher At Large (1992)
* The Great Ideas: A Lexicon of Western Thought (1992)
* Natural Theology, Chance, and God (The Great Ideas Today, 1992)
* The Four Dimensions of Philosophy: Metaphysical-Moral-Objective-Categorical (1993)
* Art, the Arts, and the Great Ideas (1994)
* Adler’s Philosophical Dictionary: 125 Key Terms for the Philosopher’s Lexicon (1995)

Edited works

* The New Technology: Servant or Master (in work, with Phillip W. Goetz)
* Scholasticism and Politics (1940)
* Great Books of the Western World (1952, 52 volumes), 2nd edition 1990, 60 volumes
* A Syntopicon: An Index to The Great Ideas (1952, 2 volumes), 2nd edition 1990
* The Great Ideas Today (1961-1977, 17 volumes), with Robert Hutchins, 1978-1999, 20 volumes
* Gateway to the Great Books (1963, 10 volumes), with Robert Hutchins
* The Annals of America (1968, 21 volumes)
* Propædia: Outline of Knowledge and Guide to The New Encyclopædia Britannica 15th Edition (1974, 30 volumes)
* Great Treasury of Western Thought (1977, with Charles Van Doren)

A Context for Jeremiah 29:11

8 Replies

“For I know the plans I have for you, declares the LORD, plans for wholeness and not for evil, to give you a future full of hope.” (Jer 29:11 ESV)

Many times, especially in the spring, when we encounter graduation cards and happy wishes for newly married couples, we find this verse. It is one of my favorite scripture passages and it is very comforting in times of transition and doubt. Yet it is almost always quoted without a context. Now, I don’t think that passages need to be always and every time read in context. But I do think that they should be understood in their contexts first and then applied outside of that context. They should initially be encountered where they stand in the text of the Bible. Only secondarily can they be made useful as moral teachings, personal messages or comforting words in times of difficulty. If we don’t take the initial step of trying to understand them in context then we easily get lost in the shuffle.

The context of Jeremiah 29:11 is very unique. The verse is in the midst of a prophetic letter which Jeremiah sent from Israel to the Jewish exiles in Babylon. It is a first person prophecy wherein Jeremiah speaks on behalf of the LORD. The LORD is telling the exiles to build houses and have children and pray. They are to be faithful to him in exile and then he promises to bring them back to Israel. The verse comes in the midst of his promise to bring them back to the Holy Land, where they will seek and find him and pray to him and call upon him. He will gather them back into the land.

If we understand the verse with its context, the application is a little bit different. It is not about future plans for something completely new, but future plans for the restoration of something lost. It is about bringing the people back to the the Land. God promises his faithfulness to his people who seek him “with all their hearts” (29:13). It is about God restoring his relationship with his people and them coming back to him in faithful love. It not only calls for trust, but for prayer, love and worship. God not only promises to love his people and be faithful to them, but he asks them to be faithful to him, to love him to draw near to him. God does have plans for us–plans to restore and heal and prosper our relationships with him, to bring us back from a land of sin and evil to a land of his bountiful goodness, his blessing, his life. Jeremiah 29:11 is not just about assuaging our anxieties about the future, but about the growth and restoration of our own relationships with God.

Thomas Aquinas’ “16 Precepts for Acquiring Knowledge”

4 Replies

Since I am a student and a Catholic one at that, I try to learn how to be a better student constantly. Thomas Aquinas once wrote a letter to a certain Brother John about the principles of good study. Aquinas lays out his philosophy of how to study. A lot of it has to do with avoiding social contact, which I find more applicable to a more monastic approach to study. It should be noted that Aquinas was not a monk, but a mendicant. Yet he did live a religious life in community as a priest. Despite the hermit/monk flavor of some of the precepts, this list is extremely helpful in learning to think like a professional. Some of the shortest maxims are the most helpful. Let me know what you think of it.

“My Very Dear Brother,
Since you have asked me how you ought to study in order to amass the treasures of knowledge, listen to the advice which I am going to give you.
As a mere stripling,

1. Advance up the streams, and do not all at once plunge into the deep: such is my caution, and your lesson. I bid you to

2. Be chary of speech,

3. Slower still in frequenting places of talk:

4. Embrace purity of conscience,

5. Pray unceasingly,

6. Love to keep to your cell if you wish to be admitted into the mystic wine-cellar.

7. Show yourself genial to all:

8. Pay no heed to other folk’s affairs:

9. Be not over-familiar with any person, because over-much familiarity breeds contempt, and gives occasion to distraction from study.

10. On no account mix yourself up with the sayings and the doings of persons in the outside world.

11. Most of all, avoid all useless visits, but try rather to walk constantly in the footsteps of good and holy men.

12. Never mind from whom the lesson drops, but

13. Commit to memory whatever useful advice may be uttered.

14. Give an account to yourself of your every word and action:

15. See that you understand what you hear, and never leave a doubt unsolved:

16. Lay up all you can in the storehouse of memory, as he does who wants to fill a vase. ‘Seek not the things which are beyond thee’.

Following these ways, you will your whole life long put forth and bear both branches and fruit in the vineyard of the Lord of Sabaoth. If you take these words to heart, you will attain your desire.”

-Sixteen Precepts for Acquiring the Treasure of Knowledge by St. Thomas Aquinas