Inspiration

INSPIRATION. - From the Latin in-spirare = to breathe into, to infuse the spirit.

I. BIBLICAL INSPIRATION.

A charismatic, supernatural divine influence granted to the writers for composing the canonical books of the Old and New Testaments in such a way that God results as their principal author. Biblical i. is a dogma defined in the Council of the Vatican (Const. de fide catholica [24 Apr. 1870], ch. 2: De revelatione (Denz-U, 1787) and can. 4 [ibid., n. 1809]).

The name is derived from θεάνηστος (II Tim. 3:16), which the Vulgate rightly translates divinitus inspirata. The Greeks use θεάνηστος or ἐπίτινος.

I. EXISTENCE

The proofs of the fact of the inspiration of the canonical books of the Old and New Testaments are deduced from Jewish and Christian tradition and from Sacred Scripture.

1. Jewish tradition

Jewish tradition has not left us a doctrinal system on biblical inspiration, yet it has always professed faith in the divine origin of the canonical books of the Old Testament. The inspiration of the Pentateuch is a fundamental dogma for the Jews: "Whoever says that the Tôrah does not come from heaven will have no part in the world to come" (Sanhedhrin, 10, 1).

Although on a lower plane, the Jews also consider the Nêbhi'im and the Kêthâbhiim inspired (cf. A. Cohen, Le Talmud, Paris 1933, pp. 1713 ff.; J. Bonsirven, Le judaïsme palestinien, I, ibid. 1934, pp. 248-62). The Jewish apocrypha (e.g., Slavonic Enoch 22, 12-23, 6; the Sibylline Books, etc.), the Talmud, Philo, etc., rather exaggerate the contribution of divine influence. Flavius Josephus attests the canonicity of the books of the Old Testament as a traditional faith, professed by the Jews from childhood, for which they believe that these books contain the immutable precepts of God and are ready, if necessary, even to die to defend it, following the example of not a few martyrs (in Eusebius, Hist. eccl., III, 10).

2. Christian tradition

This faith passed as an inheritance to Christian tradition through the authority of Jesus and the Apostles, who extended it to the books of the New Testament, elucidating it and bringing it into greater prominence. Consequences of this faith are: a) the concern of the Fathers to seek profound and hidden meanings even in the smallest details of the Bible; b) the martyrdom of not a few Christians, especially under Diocletian (a.d. 303), for refusing to hand over the sacred volumes: e.g., Sts. Saturninus, Datius, Agape, Chionia and Irene, Euplius, etc.; c) the custom of carrying them out of devotion on the breast, of using them to cure the sick or to free the possessed. Some Fathers and writers testify explicitly in favor of biblical inspiration with words of profound admiration: e.g., St. Clement of Rome, the Didaché, the letter of Barnabas, St. Ignatius,

St. Justin, St. Irenaeus, St. Hippolytus of Rome, St. Cyprian, St. Epiphanius, Tertullian (Catholic), the Alexandrian and Antiochene schools, Sts. Basil, Ephrem, Jerome, Augustine, Gregory the Great, etc. The faith of the Church is expressed solemnly already in the Nicene Creed and in the Gelasian Decree (492-96).

The examination of the Sacred Books has found in them nothing that is repugnant to biblical inspiration, but has rather confirmed that under the religious, moral, literary aspect, etc., they are worthy of being considered a divine work. The objections that come from the narratives of immoral deeds, from the presumed mercenary character of the Old Testament, from the legitimization of frauds and lies (cf. those of Abraham with Sarah, Jacob with Isaac, of Jael, Jephthah, Samson, Judith, etc.) are easily refuted. Indeed, in these very episodes the law of retribution is applied, whereby whoever sins is punished and whoever is faithful to God is rewarded even in the present life.

3. The texts of Sacred Scripture

Various texts of Sacred Scripture attest the inspiration of the books of the Old Testament.

They indeed report or presuppose the various elements from which it results that the sacred writer is a "prophet" (Mt. 26, 56; Lk. 18, 31; 24, 25; Rom. 16, 26; Heb. 1, 1-2, etc.), that he writes under the influence of God who fills him with the Holy Spirit (Hos. 9, 7; Mic. 3, 8; Ezek. 2, 2; 3, 12; 8, 13; 11, 5, 24; Zech. 7, 12; II Sam. 23, 2; Eccl. 39, 8; 48, 27; II Esdr. 14, 21, 25, 40-44); who orders him to speak or to write (Ex. 17, 14; 34, 27; Deut. 31, 19; Is. 8, 1; 30, 8; Hab. 2, 2; Dan. 8, 26; 12, 4; Ezek. 24, 2; in a special way Jer. 36) and to set forth only what God wills (Deut. 18, 15-22; Jer. 23, 16; 20, 7-9, 15, 19; 14, 14; Ezek. 13, 3-17; Mic. 3, 5-8; Zech. 7, 12; cf. II Sam. 7, 1 ff.), declares divine (Hos. 4, 1; Joel 1, 1; Am. 1, 6, 9, 11, 13; 2, 1 etc.; Obad. 1; Jon. 1, 1; 3, 1; Mic. 1, 1; 3, 5; 6, 1; Nah. 1, 12; Zeph. 1, 1; Hag. 1, 1; 2, 1, 11, 21; Zech. 1, 1; 7, 1 ff.) what he has written; reports visions, revelations or supernatural dreams (Num. 12, 6 ff.; Is. 6, 20; Jer. 1, 11-16; Ezek. 4, 1-5, 4; Jer. 4, 20 ff.; Is. 5, 9; 22, 14; Ezek. 9, 1; Jer. 20, 7-12; 23, 28; Mic. 3, 8; Is. 6, 6-9; Jer. 1, 17-19; Ezek. 3, 8-9). The hagiographer or biblical writer is therefore the intermediary through whom God speaks or writes (Hos. 1, 1-2; Hag. 1, 7; Mal. 1, 1), he is the mouth of God (Jer. 15, 19; Is. 30, 2, in accordance with Ex. 4, 15 ff.; 7, 1). Some symbolic actions describe plastically the divine influence on the prophet-writer, e.g., Ezekiel must devour the book that contains the object of his preaching (Ezek. 2, 8-3, 3); the lips of Isaiah and Jeremiah are purified so that they may be made fit for their ministry. God places the words in their mouth (Jer. 1, 9; Is. 6, 6); he orders Jeremiah to put in writing all the prophecies held from the beginning of his ministry until the 4th year of Jehoiakim and to rewrite them after the volume has been burned by the King (Jer. 36). Another proof of the inspiration of the Old Testament is furnished by the titles with which the books are designated, namely "holy," "sacred" (II Macc. 12, 9; II Macc. 8, 23), "book of the Lord" (Is. 34, 16), or simply "book" or "Scripture" (Dan. 9, 2; Ex. 17, 14 etc.).

The New Testament offers much more explicit texts. Some allow one to glimpse a special origin of the books of the Old Testament, since, adducing them simply with the formulas of "Scripture" (ἡ γραφή) "it is written" (γέγραπται: Jn. 10, 34 ff.; Mt. 4, 4, etc.) to settle every question, they consider them of an undisputed authority and superior to every other, precisely insofar as they are "the Writing," "the Scripture" par excellence. Since the Jews possessed other books of regard, such authority is not explained by supposing that these were the only books of their literature. Nor is it justified by the prestige of their authors, even if of Moses, because not all the books of such authors have been elevated to the rank of divinely inspired Scriptures. Their origin is therefore connected to a divine intervention that makes it superior to every exception and to every human book.

Other passages call the Old Testament writings τὰ λόγια τοῦ Θεοῦ (= "oracles of God": Rom. 3, 2); λόγια ζῶντα (= "living oracles": Acts 7, 38); λόγος τοῦ Θεοῦ (= "word of God": Mk. 7, 13) etc. The biblical Books are designated as "holy" (Rom. 1, 2) and "sacred" (II Tim. 3, 15), that is, of divine origin.

Still others affirm the infallibility and an ineluctable necessity of fulfillment of what "is written" (cf., e.g., Lk. 18, 31; Mt. 5, 18; Acts 1, 16; 3, 8, 21); they proclaim its supreme and uncontested authority to settle all questions that touch faith and morals, recognized by Jesus, by the Apostles and by the Jews. Christ affirms that the Scripture cannot be destroyed (λυθήναι: cf. Jn. 10, 35; Rom. 1, 17; Gal. 3, 1 ff.; I Cor. 9, 9 etc.). Such authority presupposes an obligation to receive it that can come only from an external disposition, superior to human authorities, and includes a dignity superior to all other books. Only because they are divine could the Sacred Books rise to the eminence of a norm in matters of faith and morals (cf. Rom. 15, 4; I Cor. 9, 10).

Other passages emphasize the part of God and the contribution of man; of God as principal author; of man as instrument. For example, in Mt. 1:22 God "through" (βίᾳ) the prophet Isaiah (8:8; cf. Mt. 2:15) foretells of the Virgin who will give birth; in Lk. 1:70 He speaks "through the mouth (βίᾳ στόματος) of the holy prophets"; in Mt. 22:43, David "in the Spirit" (ἐν πνεύματι) composed Ps. 110:1; in Acts 1:16 the Holy Spirit foretold "through the mouth" (βίᾳ στόματος) of David the "Scripture" of Ps. 41:10; in Acts 4:25, on the other hand, it is affirmed that God speaks Ps. 2:1, through the Holy Spirit, through the mouth of David (cf. F. J. F. Jackson-K. Lake, The beginnings of christianity, IV, London 1933, pp. 46-47. It can be translated: "who through the Spirit of the holy mouth of David, thy servant..."). According to Paul the Holy Spirit spoke to the Fathers through Isaiah (Acts 28:26-27 = Is. 6:9-10). In other texts the Old Testament is cited with only the name of the Holy Spirit, so that the human author passes into second place (for example, Hebr. 2:4; 3:7; 9:8; 10:15). Besides this series of texts, the New Testament presents two that can be called classic, namely: II Tim. 3:16 and II Pt. 1:20.

The capital text is II Tim. 3:16: "Every Scripture is divinely inspired (and) also useful for teaching, for reproving, for correcting, for training in righteousness." The verb "is" seems to have to be supplied immediately after the subject (ἡ γραφή), because this is required by the και without a verb before "useful" (ὠρήλιος) and by the context, since Paul in v. 16 wishes to demonstrate why Timothy can be instructed unto wisdom and salvation by the study of Sacred Scripture, namely because "it is divinely inspired and (therefore) useful...". The "Scripture" is that of the Old Testament, because the term γραφή is used in this sense in the New Testament and because in the context it is a question of that which Timothy learned from his mother Eunice and his grandmother Lois, who were Hebrews.

The expression πᾶσα γραφή can be understood in a distributive sense: "Everything that comes under the name of Scripture (therefore every book and every passage of the Old Testament)"; or in a collective sense (as a proper name): "the whole of Scripture." The adjective θεόπνευστος (θεός-πνέω) is to be taken in a passive sense, "divinely inspired," in accordance with the adjectives in -στος and with the common interpretation of the Fathers and Greek writers. Whence it is affirmed that the Old Testament comes from God through inspiration, that is, through a communication made intellectually to the writer. The active sense is less probable, although profound: "every Scripture that radiates God," or "from which God breathes forth."

In another passage (II Pt. 1:20 ff.), St. Peter affirms (1:12-20) that the reality of the dynamis and of the Parousia of Jesus, besides being shown by his own personal experience of it in the Transfiguration, is demonstrated also by the (written) word of the Prophets (προφητικὴ λάγος). Therefore he exhorts the faithful to pay attention to it, that is, to follow it as one fixes one's eyes on a lamp shining at night in a dark place, until the desired day of the Parousia dawns, in which the morning star will shine in their hearts, keeping in mind as an important point that "no prophecy of Scripture becomes (ὁν γίνεται) a matter of private interpretation. For no prophecy was ever uttered by the will of man, but (holy) men spoke on behalf of God, because they were carried (γεφόμενοι) by the Holy Spirit."

By "prophecy of (contained in) Scripture," Peter means the Old Testament, whose predictions concerning the Messiah are considered as a living and continuous magisterium (cf. Rom. 16:26). "It is not a matter of private interpretation" can be understood of its objective origin, that is: the Old Testament "is not the result of the private lucubration of the Prophets," as the pseudo-doctors taught. However, even holding the common interpretation (the interpretation of Sacred Scripture is not left to the arbitrary judgment of each individual), one has an indirect proof of the inspiration of the Old Testament; it is not left to the arbitrary interpretation of each individual precisely because it has a meaning established by God. According to Peter, therefore, "the prophecy" (the Old Testament) is willed by the divine will, not by the initiative or caprice of man; for this purpose God raised up holy men to whom He communicated an influence, by which they were as it were carried (φερόμενοι) by the Holy Spirit to write it, not in their own name, but as representatives of God (ἀπὸ Θεοῦ).

The texts of Paul and of Peter complement each other. Peter attributes to God the initiative of the composition of the Old Testament and of the communication of the energy that makes the hagiographer capable of writing it as a representative of God; Paul asserts that the Old Testament comes from God through a direct communication to the intellect of the hagiographer.

The inspiration of the books of the New Testament, moreover, is demonstrated by tradition, as results from the history of the Canon and from their being equated, in fact and in theory, to the books of the Old Testament. There recur, furthermore, various allusions to the divine origin of individual apostolic books.

St. John often declares that he must write the Apocalypse by order of God (Apoc. 1:11, 19; 2:1, 8, 12, 18; 3:1, 7, 14; 19:9) and calls his book a "prophecy," to which nothing must be added or taken away, by divine disposition (ibid. 22:9, 10, 18-19). In I Tim. 5:18 it seems that Paul cites Lk. 1:9, 7, equating it with Deut. 25:4. Peter places the letters of Paul and the "other Scriptures," that is, those of the Old Testament, on the same level (II Pt. 3:16), and declares that Paul wrote them according to "the wisdom that was given to him" (cf. I Cor. 2:13), that is, by the Holy Spirit. Therefore, according to Peter, the Corpus Paulinum known to him was composed under a special influence of the Holy Spirit. It must have enjoyed great importance in the Church, if the false interpretation given of it stirred up so much commotion. Probably it was already held to be normative in matters of faith and morals. One can therefore deduce that from the time of the Apostles a special intervention of God was seen in the composition of the writings of the New Testament.

As a dogma, biblical inspiration must be admitted by all and therefore requires a criterion by which it can be easily discerned. Protestants for this purpose establish various criteria that are either too subjective or too scientific, in any case insufficient. J. D. Michaelis considered inspiration as a charism required by the apostolic (and prophetic) ministry, whence he supposed that the apostolic (and prophetic) origin of the books was the criterion of their inspiration ("criterium muneris apostolatus").

The Fathers relied on tradition to distinguish the inspired books: they affirmed, that is, that they accepted them precisely because they inherited them from the ancients and from the elders with the obligation to receive them as such. They sought this tradition in the various Churches, in particular deducing it from the liturgical reading (for example, Serapion, bishop of Antioch, d. ca. 190, in Eusebius, Hist. eccl., VI, 12, 3 etc.) and tracing it back to a primitive revelation, explicit or implicit, of the Apostles. Therefore the complete and decisive criterion of inspiration is the attestation made by the Apostles implicitly (for example, by approving the books for liturgical reading) or explicitly, transmitted, interpreted and authentically proposed by the infallible magisterium of the Church. The criterion of apostolic origin had a practical and not exclusive value, inasmuch as only books written in the apostolic age and transmitted by the Apostles were accepted as divine by the Church.

II. NATURE

The Bible and tradition present God as the "author" of Sacred Scripture, who to compose it makes use of man as of a rational instrument and who "dictates" it; furthermore they designate it as θεόπνευστος. However, the hagiographer is always considered the true author of the sacred book; he wills it, conceives it, elaborates it, publishes it and attributes it to himself by affixing his own name to it. Each hagiographer is distinguished by his own stylistic and literary characteristics.

The first Christian writers treat of inspiration together with the gift of prophecy. A few Fathers and writers compare the inspired author to a musical instrument (lyre, cithara, harp, flute, organ) under the hands of the divine artist. Among those who attempted a speculative explanation are Origen, St. John Chrysostom and St. Jerome. According to Origen, the Holy Spirit dwelt in a special way in the sacred authors and moved them (κινεί) to prophesy, making use of them as of free and rational instruments (C. Celsum, III, 3: PG 11, 925, etc.). The divine influence on the intellect produced "an illumination and an illustration," which brought about "greater clarity and perspicuity"; then it moved the will and strengthened the memory. The hagiographers "in a divine manner" attained the divine meaning and "in a divine manner" saw and heard and wrote or spoke. Chrysostom too speaks of the illumination and illustration of the intellect and emphasizes the adaptation of the Holy Spirit to the limitations of the human instrument in the well-known theory of "condescension" (συντακτάβασις). The cooperation of the hagiographer is stressed in the Expositio in Ps. 48, 2 (PG 55, 225).

St. Augustine (De Gen. ad litteram, XII, 6-27: PL 34, 459-79) illustrates the three kinds of visions (corporeal, spiritual, intellectual) and brings out how God "alium sic, alium vero sic narrationem suam ordinare permitit" for the hagiographers. St. Jerome justifies the literary characteristics of the hagiographers by their cultural formation and by the milieu from which they come. Cassiodorus (Exposit. in Psalt., Praef.: PL 70, 9 ff.) gives the definition of prophecy that is adopted by the scholastics.

The Arab philosophers (Avicenna, 980-1037; Algazel, 1059-1111) treat of it under its philosophical aspect. The medieval rabbis attempt to explain inspiration, and of particular importance is the contribution of Maimonides (1130-1204). Many scholastics raise the question of the manner in which the Prophets receive divine communications and resolve it by saying that they see "in speculo aeternitatis," that is, in the divine essence as the image of all things (William of Auxerre, between 1231 and 1236; William of Auvergne, d. 1249; Philip the Chancellor, d. 1236), or else "insofar as it is an illumination that proceeds from the divine essence" (Alexander of Hales, d. 1245), or else insofar as it is something created by means of which the act of the intellect is elevated (St. Albert the Great, d. 1280). St. Bonaventure (1221-74) does not treat ex professo of biblical inspiration, but he speaks of it repeatedly, and Van den Borne draws from him the definition: "Divine instigation and direction in the service of the charism of doctor, prophet or evangelist." St. Thomas developed in a masterly way what had been written in the preceding centuries also by the Arab writers and by Maimonides, giving a systematic exposition of the nature of prophecy, which still serves as the basis for studies on biblical inspiration (Sum. Theol., 2ᵃ-2ᵃᵉ, qq. 171-74). For Duns Scotus, cf. B. Innocenti, Il b. Giovanni Duns Scoto e la Bibbia, Arezzo 1922.

The nature of biblical inspiration was explored with diligence in the last century. Insufficient hypotheses came first: 1) L. Lessius (1623) held that it could be reduced to a simple divine approval of a book written "humana industria sine assistentia Spiritus Sancti"; perhaps Il Mach. would have been composed in this way. After three of his propositions were condemned by the University of Louvain, he admitted the necessity that the hagiographer write "ex instinctu Spiritus Sancti." Similar hypotheses were advanced also by J. Bonfrère and D. Hansberg. 2) A. Calmet, Chrismann, J. Jahn (Bonferius) reduced biblical inspiration to a divine assistance to the hagiographer to safeguard him from every error. 3) For others, biblical inspiration is a moral intervention similar to a directive, to an initial impulse to write. All these hypotheses were deemed insufficient.

The Catholic doctrine on biblical inspiration is set forth in the encyclicals Providentissimus Deus (1893), Spiritus Paraclitus (1920) and Divino afflante Spiritu (1943), which attributes the progress of studies on biblical inspiration to the application of the philosophical notion of instrumental cause, recognizing in the sacred author "an organ, that is, an instrument of the Holy Spirit, living and endowed with reason." Man is considered capable of composing Sacred Scripture, as a book, even with his own unaided powers. However, the intervention of a special divine influence is established, whereby the faculties of the sacred author, which concur in the composition of a book, are placed at the service of God in its composition, so that the book may be attributed also to God and in a principal way. The encyclical Providentissimus describes the various aspects of the divine influence: "Nam supernaturali Ipse virtute ita eos ad scribendum excitavit et movit, ita scribentibus adstitit, ut ea omnia eaque sola, quae ipse iuberet et recte mente conciperent et fideliter conscribere vellent, et apte infallibili veritate exprimerent; secus non Ipse esset auctor S. Scripturae universae." According to Spiritus Paraclitus, biblical inspiration is a divine grace whereby God communicates to the mind of the writer a light to utter to men "ex persona Dei" the truth, moves the will and impels him to write, and assists him in a peculiar and continuous manner until the book is composed.

The inspirative influence is therefore distinguished from all graces and from God's ordinary concurrence with creatures: it is gratis datum, not gratum faciens, although as a rule it is granted to pious persons; it is given for the duration of the composition of the book; its characteristic is to invest man's rational faculties so as to render them capable of writing the book of God. The first result therefore is to elevate, excite, move and sustain the human faculties, each according to its own nature.

The influence on the intellect is an illumination that induces it to see and judge as God wills. It is therefore an illuminating and motive influence. What are its limits? It is not necessary to extend it to the so-called gathering of literary material (research, consultations, collection of information, etc.), since this is not essentially required by the notion of author. But it must intervene in the judgment concerning the material, which can be speculative (on the truth of the information) and practical (on the expediency of putting it in writing). There is no doubt that it extends to the practical, and probably also to the speculative; since they are psychologically united and the one is based on the other, their separation would be unnatural and violent and contrary to the notion of instrumental cause; nor would God prove to be the author of the sacred book if he did not make his own the things it contains, expressing his own judgment through the hagiographer. According to some, the influence intrinsically corroborates the intellect and illumines the things to be written with a more brilliant light; probably, however, it suffices to limit it to a subordination of the intellect, whereby it judges as God wills: in fact, if it can judge with its own powers, it is required only that it judge moved and directed by God; this is sufficient for it to be said that its judgment is provoked or willed by God.

The revelation properly so called is not to be confused with inspiration, which is an impulse to write either things already known or things revealed. In general the Bible contains things already known to the hagiographer before the inspiration. Revelation occurs only in a few cases. Since inspiration does not annul but rather second the rational nature of man, it is not necessary that the hagiographer be aware of his inspiration, unlike the prophet, who must speak in the name and with the authority of God. It nevertheless enlightens and activates the intellect, so that it excludes the frenzy and manic exaltation proper to the pagan seers, nor does it entail, as such, ecstasy.

The influence on the will is the communication of an energy that shakes, awakens, and impels the will to write what by practical judgment has been judged as needing to be put in writing. God acts in a mysterious way, safeguarding human freedom.

The influence on the executive faculties (memory, recollection, imagination; brain, nerves, muscles) must also be examined. Since these faculties play a great part in the vividness of the images, in the exactness and clarity of the details, etc., and therefore in the composition of the book, at least a divine assistance is necessary so that errors may be avoided and the judgments of the intellect rendered with infallible fidelity.

The inspirational influence on collaborators, secretaries, amanuenses, glossators, etc. is circumscribed to the scope and nature of their collaboration in the composition of Sacred Scripture.

Inspiration is a characteristic exclusive to the books of the Old and New Testaments and has nothing to do with the inspiration attributed to poets, men of letters, artists, seers, the books of pagan religions, the sibyls, etc., nor even with the private inspiration sometimes granted to certain saints.

III. EXTENT

Catholic doctrine, based on 2 Tim. 3:16, on tradition, on the notion of God as the author of Sacred Scripture, on its dignity, etc., holds that all parts of the Bible, without exception or distinction, are divinely inspired, and the encyclical Providentissimus has condemned those opinions that limit it to matters of religion or morals, denying it for the biblical parts that contain historical, profane, natural-science information, etc. (Holden, in 1662; F. Lenormant [v.]; S. Di Bartolo [v.], regarding the obiter dicta, particular incidental matters such as, for example, 2 Tim. 4:13; Tob. 11:9, etc. [Cardinal Newman]), and that therefore have no connection with the attainment of the ultimate end (G. Semeria).

The theory of the old Protestants, according to which God would have materially dictated the words through the imagination or the intellect of the hagiographer, is by now outdated, because it is contrary to the dignity of human nature, and because it is incapable of explaining stylistic diversities, the literary labor of the hagiographers, etc. All Catholics require in the hagiographer at least a special assistance, by which he is placed in a position to choose words suited to faithfully render the concepts to be expressed. They dispute only whether the choice of individual words (in "individual") is left entirely to the hagiographer (J. B. Franzelin) or is made by him instrumentally (psychological verbal i.). There are arguments in favor of both opinions. However, those of the first count rather against the mechanical verbal i. of the Protestants. The difference between the two opinions is not great: in the first, God influences the hagiographer so that he chooses the suitable word, leaving him free to prefer one or another among the suitable ones; in the second, instead, He determines him to choose even the individual words, that is, one suitable one among the suitable ones. The latter seems more probable, because it is more in conformity with the notion of instrumental cause, with the inseparability of words from ideas, with tradition, with the notion of the Bible as Verbum Dei, etc. The diversity of style would derive from the diversity of the instruments (hagiographers) employed by God, who adapts Himself to their character and dignity.

IV. EFFECTS

The first result of inspiration is that the sacred book must be attributed to God as its principal author, thereby acquiring a divine authority. Nevertheless, not everything in it is divine in the same way. But that which comes from God, from angels and saints speaking in God's name, or from the hagiographer in his capacity as hagiographer, is divine in itself. Only by virtue of inspiration is that divine which the hagiographer relates as a historian without pronouncing on its goodness, which therefore does not change by the fact that it is related in the Bible. What it affirms, approves, disapproves, narrates, etc., is affirmed, approved, disapproved, narrated, etc., by God in that manner in which it is expressed by the hagiographer. A person's approval does not extend to each and every one of his deeds. The counsels given by the hagiographer not as such do not become God's counsels, but remain the counsels of a prudent person (e.g., I Tim. 3:23; II Tim. 4:13, 21). Base deeds are always implicitly disapproved, virtuous ones approved within the limits of the morality professed. When the hagiographer cites literary sources, it must be supposed that in principle he approves of them (e.g., I Kings 11:41; 14:29; 15:31, etc.). From the context one can infer in individual cases to what extent he does not approve of them (v. CITAZIONI IMPLICITE).

Another most important effect of inspiration is immunity from errors, which belongs to the Bible; on this see INERRANZA.

II. DIVINE INSPIRATION.

Illustrations and supernatural influences with which God moves souls, and to which spiritual theology also gives the name of divine "instinct," often referring them to the Holy Spirit, because the works of sanctification are attributed to him by appropriation. Inspirations belong to the order of actual graces.

They must not be confused with revelations and internal locutions, which communicate new ideas through an extraordinary divine-angelic influence. They are simple intellectual illustrations that make one better know what one already possesses, or particular motions in the will and in the feelings, which incite one to better perform certain actions intended by God. Even the unbelieving and sinners can receive inspirations (Leo XIII, encyclical De Spiritu Sancto, 1897). It is important to be docile to them, since God always leads to perfection and salvation the soul that follows his invitations and initiative (Jn 6:44; cf. Ps 20:4); ordinarily, in proportion to one's faithfulness in following the small inspirations, God disposes the soul to receive greater ones.

The inspirations are not necessarily perceived; God's action most often escapes consciousness. Consequently, ascetics recommends being attentive to act in everything according to the lights of reason and of faith, to observe particularly those motions and affections that one feels arising in the soul on the occasion of pious practices, readings, and at the sight of good examples or on hearing the divine word, God very often making use of such means to stir up his inspirations. Man, however, can also be deceived, and since he can be subject to the motions of both good and evil angels, he must diligently examine the inspirations (I Io. 4, 6). Generally those that strengthen one in good, in humility, in obedience to authority, in charity, etc., come from the good spirit. In doubtful cases it is prudent to turn to the counsel of a good spiritual director. Famous rules for discerning interior motions were written by St. Ignatius of Loyola in the Spiritual Exercises (Regulae ad spiritus dignoscendos, I et II hebd.)

The alumbrados and other pseudo-mystics erred in opposing the inspirations of the Holy Spirit and his guidance to the external precepts of ecclesiastical authority; and so did the quietists (v.), whose general principle was that one should wait, before any internal or external action, for a special motion of the Holy Spirit, otherwise the act would have proceeded from self-love. Such errors were condemned by the Church (J. De Guibert, Documenta, 213, 406, 438-48, 461).

Arnaldo M. Lanz

III. INSPIRATION IN NON-CHRISTIAN RELIGIONS.

In non-Christian religions, inspiration belongs to that type of divination which does not depend on external signs, but on a suggestion coming from a divinity or from another supernatural source. When the inspiration occurs through the supposed possession that, following preliminary excitation, a spirit takes of an individual, making him speak and act at its will, we have shamanism (v.).

When the inspiration occurs in a particularly sacred place, and through a person who is assisted by a trained priesthood, we have the oracle (v.).

Individual inspiration is held to be that which occurs through visions, hallucinations, dreams (v. INCUBATION), regarded by the popular mentality as manifestations of a higher world.

The historical religions that arose later, as a reaction to or integration of the natural ones, thanks to the work of a founder or reformer, almost all possess a canon of sacred scriptures, held to come from the divinity itself through the revelation of the reformer or prophet. The Avesta of the Mazdeans, inspired by Ahura Mazda to Zarathustra, and the Koran, existing ab aeterno in heaven and revealed by Allāh to Muhammad through the ministry of the archangel Gabriel, are the two typical cases of inspiration that the faithful believe came directly from God.

Some religions, although without claiming this direct inspiration, have sacred scriptures containing the tradition of the country, to which a normative value for religious and moral life is attributed; such are the Vedas of India, the King of Confucian China, the Taotsang of the Taoists, whose central core consists of the Tao te King of Laotse, the Tripitaka (Tipitaka in Pali) of Buddhism, the Siddhanta of Jainism, the Granth of the Sikhs. The Manichaeans, Mandaeans, Bābīs, and Bahā'īs also have their sacred books.

Nicola Turchi