theologico-political treatise p2(神学与政治专题研究2)-第12节
按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
authority and testimony of philosophers； and； consequently； would be
compelled to suppose that the interpretations given by philosophers were
infallible。
（172） Truly this would be a new form of ecclesiastical authority； and a
new sort of priests or pontiffs； more likely to excite men's ridicule than
their veneration。 （173） Certainly our method demands a knowledge of
Hebrew for which the masses have no leisure； but no such objection as the
foregoing can be brought against us。 （174） For the ordinary Jews or
Gentiles； to whom the prophets and apostles preached and wrote；
understood the language； and； consequently； the intention of the prophet or
apostle addressing them； but they did not grasp the intrinsic reason of what
was preached； which； according to Maimonides； would be necessary for
an understanding of it。
（175） There is nothing； then； in our method which renders it necessary
that the masses should follow the testimony of commentators； for I point
to a set of unlearned people who understood the language of the prophets
and apostles； whereas Maimonides could not point to any such who could
arrive at the prophetic or apostolic meaning through their knowledge of
the causes of things。
（176） As to the multitude of our own time； we have shown that
whatsoever is necessary to salvation； though its reasons may be unknown；
can easily be understood in any language； because it is thoroughly
ordinary and usual； it is in such understanding as this that the masses
acquiesce； not in the testimony of commentators； with regard to other
questions； the ignorant and the learned fare alike。
（177） But let us return to the opinion of Maimonides； and examine it
more closely。 In the first place； he supposes that the prophets were in
entire agreement one with another； and that they were consummate
philosophers and theologians； for he would have them to have based their
conclusions on the absolute truth。 （178） Further； he supposes that the sense
of Scripture cannot be made plain from Scripture itself； for the truth of
things is not made plain therein （in that it does not prove any thing； nor
teach the matters of which it speaks through their definitions and first
37
… Page 38…
A Theologico…Political Treatise Part 2
causes）； therefore； according to Maimonides； the true sense of Scripture
cannot be made plain from itself； and must not be there sought。
（179） The falsity of such a doctrine is shown in this very chapter； for
we have shown both by reason and examples that the meaning of Scripture
is only made plain through Scripture itself； and even in questions
deducible from ordinary knowledge should be looked for from no other
source。
（180） Lastly； such a theory supposes that we may explain the words of
Scripture according to our preconceived opinions； twisting them about；
and reversing or completely changing the literal sense； however plain it
may be。 （181） Such licence is utterly opposed to the teaching of this and
the preceding chapters； and； moreover； will be evident to everyone as rash
and excessive。
（182） But if we grant all this licence； what can it effect after all？
Absolutely nothing。 （183） Those things which cannot be demonstrated；
and which make up the greater part of Scripture； cannot be examined by
reason； and cannot therefore be explained or interpreted by this rule；
whereas； on the contrary； by following our own method； we can explain
many questions of this nature； and discuss them on a sure basis； as we
have already shown； by reason and example。 （184） Those matters which
are by their nature comprehensible we can easily explain； as has been
pointed out； simply by means of the context。
（185） Therefore； the method of Maimonides is clearly useless： to
which we may add； that it does away with all the certainty which the
masses acquire by candid reading； or which is gained by any other persons
in any other way。 （186） In conclusion； then； we dismiss Maimonides'
theory as harmful； useless； and absurd。
（187） As to the tradition of the Pharisees； we have already shown that
it is not consistent； while the authority of the popes of Rome stands in
need of more credible evidence； the latter； indeed； I reject simply on this
ground； for if the popes could point out to us the meaning of Scripture as
surely as did the high priests of the Jews； I should not be deterred by the
fact that there have been heretic and impious Roman pontiffs； for among
the Hebrew high…priests of old there were also heretics and impious men
38
… Page 39…
A Theologico…Political Treatise Part 2
who gained the high… priesthood by improper means； but who；
nevertheless； had Scriptural sanction for their supreme power of
interpreting the law。 （See Deut。 xvii：11； 12； and xxxiii：10； also Malachi
ii：8。）
（188） However； as the popes can show no such sanction； their
authority remains open to very grave doubt； nor should anyone be
deceived by the example of the Jewish high…priests and think that the
Catholic religion also stands in need of a pontiff； he should bear in mind
that the laws of Moses being also the ordinary laws of the country；
necessarily required some public authority to insure their observance； for；
if everyone were free to interpret the laws of his country as he pleased； no
state could stand； but would for that very reason be dissolved at once； and
public rights would become private rights。
（189） With religion the case is widely different。 Inasmuch as it consists
not so much in outward actions as in simplicity and truth of character； it
stands outside the sphere of law and public authority。 （190） Simplicity and
truth of character are not produced by the constraint of laws； nor by the
authority of the state； no one the whole world over can be forced or
legislated into a state of blessedness； the means required for such a
consummation are faithful and brotherly admonition； sound education； and；
above all； free use of the individual judgment。
（191） Therefore； as the supreme right of free thinking； even on religion；
is in every man's power； and as it is inconceivable that such power could
be alienated； it is also in every man's power to wield the supreme right and
authority of free judgment in this behalf； and to explain and interpret
religion for himself。 （192） The only reason for vesting the supreme
authority in the interpretation of law； and judgment on public affairs in the
hands of the magistrates； is that it concerns questions of public right。 （193）
Similarly the supreme authority in explaining religion； and in passing
judgment thereon； is lodged with the individual because it concerns
questions of individual right。 （194） So far； then； from the authority of the
Hebrew high…priests telling in confirmation of the authority of the Roman
pontiffs to interpret religion； it would rather tend to establish individual
freedom of judgment。 （195） Thus in this way also； we have shown that our
39
… Page 40…
A Theologico…Political Treatise Part 2
method of interpreting Scripture is the best。 （196） For as the highest power
of Scriptural interpretation belongs to every man； the rule for such
interpretation should be nothing but the natural light of reason which is
common to all … not any supernatural light nor any external authority；
moreover； such a rule ought not to be so difficult that it can only be
applied by very skilful philosophers； but should be adapted to the natural
and ordinary
