GORICO-TYPICAL and the ALLEGORICO-MYSTICAL, are found in the Christian writers as early as the 1st and 2d centures ; the latter as yv6ct-ts, the mer as a demonstration that all and everything, both what had happened, and what would come to pass, was somehow contained in the sacred tures (see Justin Martyr, as quoted above, and tullian, Adversus Marcionem, iV. 2, Prxdicatio discipulorum suspecta fieri posset si non assistat a:uctoritas.
To these allegorical modes of interpretation way added a third mode, which necessarily sprung up after the rise of the Catholico-apostolical church, namely, the DOGMATICAL, or THEOLOGICO-ECCLE SIASTICAL. The followers of the Catholico-apos tolical church agreed that all apostles and all apostolical writings had an equal authority, be cause they were all under an equal guidance of the Holy Ghost. Hence it followed that they could not set forth either contradictory or different doc trines. A twofold expedient was adopted in order to effect harmony of interpretation. The one was of the apparent and relative kind, because it re ferred to subjects which appear incomprehensible only to the confined hu tnan understanding, but which are in perfect harmony in the divine thoughts. Justin (Dialogus cum Trybkone, c. 63) says :—lx 7ravrbs x-cre(0-a.lvos Ifrt oi,SEyla ypa01) &curia eaT2p, abrds voelv aStXXov OyoXolt4o-co 'Fa cipndueva. St. Chrysustom rcstricted this as follows :-71-din-a. o-acbij /cal clie/a rex, irczpit rais Oetcas -ypaOcas, rcivra rat (Tway/ma SijXa (Ilonzil.
c. 4. in E.p. 2 ad Thessalonicenses) (comp.
de Lazar°, and Athanasii Oratio contra settles ; Opera i. p. 12).
The SECOND expedient adopted by the church was to consider certain articles of faith to be LEADING DOCTRINES, and to regulate and de fine accordingly the sense of the Bible wherever it appeared doubtful and uncertain. This led to the TIIEOLOGICO-ECCLESIASTICAL or DOGMATICAL mode of interpretation, which, when the Chris tians were divided into several sects, proved to be indispensable to the Church, but which adopted various forms in the various sects by vvhich it was employed. Not only the heretics of ancient times, but also the followers of the Roman Catholic, the Greek Catholic, the Syrian, the Anglican, the Pro testant Church, etc., have endeavoured to interpret
the Bible in harmony with their dogmas.
The different modes of interpreting the Bible are, according to what we have stated, the following three—the GRAMMATICAL, the ALLEGORICAL, the DOGMATICAL. The grammatical mode of interpre tation simply investigates the sense contained in the words of the Bible. The allegorical, accord ing to Quintilian's sentence, aliud verbis, aliud sensu ostendo,' maintains that the words of the Bible have, besides their simple sense, another which is concealed as behind a picture, and en deavours to find out this supposed figurative sense, which, it is said, was not intended by the authors (see Olshausen, Eizz Wart fiber tieferen Schriftsinn, Konigsberg 1S2.4.). The dogmatical mode of in terpretation endeavours to explain the Bible in harmony with the dogmas of the church, following the principle of analogia fidei. Comp. Cancilii sess. iv. decret. 2 :—Ne quis Sacram Scripturam interpretari audeat contra eum sensum quern tenuit et tenet sancta mater ecclesia, cujus est judicare de vero sensu et interpretatione Scriptu rarum Sacrarum.
Rambach, Institatiomes Hermenenticze Sacra', Jerim 1723 : Auctoritas, quam hmc analogia fidei in re exegetica habet, in eo consistit, ut sit fundamen tum ac principium generale, ad cujus normam omnes Scripturm expositiones, tamquam ad lapi dem Lydium, exigendm sunt.
Anslican Church, art. xx. :—ECCLESL-E non licet quicquam instituere, quod verbo Dei scripto adversetur, nec unum Scripturm locum sic exponere potest, alteri contradicat It is not lawful for the church to ordain anything that is contrary to God's word written, neither may it expound one place of Scripture so as to be repugnant to an other.' Confessio Scotica, IS :—Nullam enim interpreta tionem admittere audemus, quae alicui principali arti culo fidei, aut alicui piano textui Scripturm, aut caritatis regulm repugnat, etc. We dare not ad mit any interpretation which contradicts any lead ing article of faith, or any plain text of Scripture, or the rule of charity, etc.